Christina M Yver, Elizabeth R McGonagle, Tessa A Hadlock
{"title":"\"为实现微笑而进行的腓肠肌游离移植术后肌肉变短:何处、何时、为何?","authors":"Christina M Yver, Elizabeth R McGonagle, Tessa A Hadlock","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gracilis free muscle transfer (GFMT) remains the standard for smile restoration in patients with longstanding facial palsy. Resting oral commissure lateralization (ROCL) following GFMT is aesthetically unappealing and can cause functional problems including dysarthria and oral incompetence. The risk factors for ROCL following GFMT are poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Of all patients who underwent GFMT for smile restoration from 2003 to 2021, patients with subsequent ROCL were identified from a facial nerve database using predetermined search criteria. Medical records were reviewed to identify potential risk factors for muscle foreshortening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 412 patients who underwent successful GFMT since 2003, 41 patients (10%) subsequently developed ROCL. ROCL rates varied significantly based on gracilis innervation source, with ipsilateral cranial nerve VII innervation and dual innervation (crossfacial nerve graft plus ipsilateral-to-masseter nerve) demonstrating the highest foreshortening rates (27.3% and 15.4%, respectively), compared with the lowest rates of foreshortening when the gracilis muscle was innervated by the crossfacial nerve graft alone (3.2%) ( P = 0.005). Patients with a history of irradiation to the surgical field were significantly more likely to develop ROCL (22%) compared with those without a history of irradiation (8.6%) ( P < 0.001). Furthermore, the rate of ROCL was significantly higher among patients who underwent concurrent stabilization of the nasolabial fold using a wide band of fascia lata (20.8%), compared with those who did not (6.6%) ( P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors report potential risk factors for ROCL following GFMT for smile restoration, including innervation source, radiation history, and concurrent fascia lata static suspension.</p><p><strong>Clinical question/level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic, III.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"794e-800e"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Muscle Foreshortening after Free Gracilis Transfer for Smile: Where? When? Why?\",\"authors\":\"Christina M Yver, Elizabeth R McGonagle, Tessa A Hadlock\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gracilis free muscle transfer (GFMT) remains the standard for smile restoration in patients with longstanding facial palsy. Resting oral commissure lateralization (ROCL) following GFMT is aesthetically unappealing and can cause functional problems including dysarthria and oral incompetence. The risk factors for ROCL following GFMT are poorly understood.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Of all patients who underwent GFMT for smile restoration from 2003 to 2021, patients with subsequent ROCL were identified from a facial nerve database using predetermined search criteria. Medical records were reviewed to identify potential risk factors for muscle foreshortening.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 412 patients who underwent successful GFMT since 2003, 41 patients (10%) subsequently developed ROCL. ROCL rates varied significantly based on gracilis innervation source, with ipsilateral cranial nerve VII innervation and dual innervation (crossfacial nerve graft plus ipsilateral-to-masseter nerve) demonstrating the highest foreshortening rates (27.3% and 15.4%, respectively), compared with the lowest rates of foreshortening when the gracilis muscle was innervated by the crossfacial nerve graft alone (3.2%) ( P = 0.005). Patients with a history of irradiation to the surgical field were significantly more likely to develop ROCL (22%) compared with those without a history of irradiation (8.6%) ( P < 0.001). Furthermore, the rate of ROCL was significantly higher among patients who underwent concurrent stabilization of the nasolabial fold using a wide band of fascia lata (20.8%), compared with those who did not (6.6%) ( P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The authors report potential risk factors for ROCL following GFMT for smile restoration, including innervation source, radiation history, and concurrent fascia lata static suspension.</p><p><strong>Clinical question/level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic, III.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20128,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"794e-800e\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic and reconstructive surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011713\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/30 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011713","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/30 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Muscle Foreshortening after Free Gracilis Transfer for Smile: Where? When? Why?
Background: Gracilis free muscle transfer (GFMT) remains the standard for smile restoration in patients with longstanding facial palsy. Resting oral commissure lateralization (ROCL) following GFMT is aesthetically unappealing and can cause functional problems including dysarthria and oral incompetence. The risk factors for ROCL following GFMT are poorly understood.
Methods: Of all patients who underwent GFMT for smile restoration from 2003 to 2021, patients with subsequent ROCL were identified from a facial nerve database using predetermined search criteria. Medical records were reviewed to identify potential risk factors for muscle foreshortening.
Results: Of 412 patients who underwent successful GFMT since 2003, 41 patients (10%) subsequently developed ROCL. ROCL rates varied significantly based on gracilis innervation source, with ipsilateral cranial nerve VII innervation and dual innervation (crossfacial nerve graft plus ipsilateral-to-masseter nerve) demonstrating the highest foreshortening rates (27.3% and 15.4%, respectively), compared with the lowest rates of foreshortening when the gracilis muscle was innervated by the crossfacial nerve graft alone (3.2%) ( P = 0.005). Patients with a history of irradiation to the surgical field were significantly more likely to develop ROCL (22%) compared with those without a history of irradiation (8.6%) ( P < 0.001). Furthermore, the rate of ROCL was significantly higher among patients who underwent concurrent stabilization of the nasolabial fold using a wide band of fascia lata (20.8%), compared with those who did not (6.6%) ( P < 0.001).
Conclusion: The authors report potential risk factors for ROCL following GFMT for smile restoration, including innervation source, radiation history, and concurrent fascia lata static suspension.
Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.
期刊介绍:
For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.