Autologous dermis graft versus conchal cartilage graft for managing lower eyelid retraction: A comparative study

Purpose: Lower eyelid management is challenging. The conchal cartilage is often considered a spacer of choice for treating lower eyelid retraction. However, dermis graft has also recently been shown to be a viable spacer. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of dermis graft to that of conchal cartilage graft in this indication. Methods: A retrospective comparative study was conducted in patients who underwent lower eyelid lengthening with autologous dermis graft (group 1) or autologous conchal cartilage graft (group 2). The main outcome measure was the reduction in inferior scleral show (ISS) assessed by three independent masked surgeons. Secondary outcome measures was the assessment of lagophthalmos and corneal keratitis. Complications were also recorded. Results: Twenty-five eyelids of 23 patients were included: 11 and 14 eyelids, respectively in group 1 (dermis graft) and group 2 (conchal cartilage graft). Patient mean follow-up was 12.3 (±12.5) and 7.1 (±7.7) months, respectively. No statistical differences in postoperative ISS reduction, lagophthalmos and exposure keratitis was observed ( p = 0.540, p = 0.946, p = 0.934, respectively). Three patients experienced a grade I Clavien–Dindo complication in group 1 and one patient experienced a grade II complication in group 2 ( p = 0.540). Conclusion: Autologous dermis grafts and conchal cartilage grafts provide favorable outcomes without major complications.

Autologous Dermis Graft Implantation: A Novel Approach to Reinforcement in Giant Hiatal Hernias

Objectives. Nonreinforced tensile repair of giant hiatal hernias is susceptible to recurrence, and the role of mesh graft implantation remains controversial. Creating a new and viable choice without the use of high-cost biological allografts is desirable. This study presents the application of dermis graft reinforcement, a cost-efficient, easily adaptable alternative, in graft reinforcement of giant hiatal hernia repairs. Methods. A 62-year-old female patient with recurrent giant hiatal hernia (9 × 11 cm) and upside down stomach, immediately following the Belsey repair done in another department, was selected for the pilot procedure. The standard three-stitch nonabsorbable reconstruction of diaphragmatic crura was undertaken via laparoscopic approach. A 12 × 6 cm dermis autograft was harvested from the loose abdominal skin. “U” figure onlay reinforcement of diaphragm closure was secured with titanium staples. The procedure was completed with a standard Dor fundoplication. One- and seven-month follow-ups were conducted. Results. No short-term postoperative complications were observed. One-month follow-up showed normal anatomical location of abdominal viscera on computed tomography imaging. High-resolution manometry showed normal lower esophageal sphincter pressure. Preoperative abdominal complaints were resolved. Procedural costs were lower than the average cost following mesh graft reinforcement. Conclusion. Dermis graft reinforcement is a cheap, easily adaptable procedure in the repair of giant hiatal hernias, even in the setting of laparoscopic reoperative procedure.