[Nasal reconstruction with a three-staged forehead flap: assessment of 16 cases].
Nicolas J., Labbé D., Soubeyrand E., Guillou-Jamard MR., Rysanek B., Compère JF.
Prospective Study with a reported sample of 16 on Scar, published in Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac (2007) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
- Level A · Stronger Clinical Evidence
- Level B · Emerging clinical evidence with positive signals
- Level C · Early human research exploring benefits
- Level D · Scientific groundwork from lab and animal studies
- Emerging · Emerging topic under active research
This page is generated from the PubMed record. The Thai description is an automated summary of bibliographic fields and the abstract, not a full translation, and is not medical advice.
- Study type
- Prospective Study
- Journal
- Rev Stomatol Chir Maxillofac (2007)
- Country
- France
- Reported sample size
- 16
- Source database
- PubMed
- PMID
- 17275048
- DOI
- 10.1016/j.stomax.2005.12.001
Abstract (original English)
We report our experience in 16 patients with a three-staged forehead flap, described by Millard (1974) and Burguet (1992) for nasal reconstruction. We wanted to determine whether the three-stage procedure improves the quality of the final aesthetic result. Sixteen patients underwent forehead flap nasal reconstruction between June 2002 and February 2005. Reconstruction was performed in three stages, a first stage for the transfer of the forehead flap on the nose, a second stage where the pediculized forehead flap was thinned (day 15) and a third stage for division of the pedicle (day 30). The quality of the final aesthetic result of nasal reconstruction was evaluated 6 months postoperatively, by the patient (patient's satisfaction with the nasal reconstruction [4 points]) and by the surgical team according to the thickness of the flap (3 points), integration of the scars (1 point), color of the flap (1 point) and the redefinition of the natural contour of the nose (1 point). A final 10-point score was used to assess the quality of the result: very good (score above 8), good (score from 7 to 8), average (score from 5 to 7) and poor (score less than 5). Sixteen nasal reconstructions were followed to completion. Outcome was considered very good in ten (62.5%), good in three (18.7%) and fair in three (18.7%). Use of the three-stage procedure for forehead flap nasal reconstruction im
What this study does not prove
- • This study does not prove SVF is an approved treatment or a replacement for standard care.
Evidence level
Early human evidence such as case series or small samples is exploring possible benefits.
How we grade evidenceBrowse all related research
Filter the research library by this study's title keywords, author, or publication year.
Related research
- Level ASystematic ReviewPubMed
Clinical Applications of Autologous Fat Grafting in Pathological Hand Conditions.
Systematic Review with a reported sample of 7 on Osteoarthritis, Scar, published in J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
- n = 7
J Hand Surg Asian Pac Vol - Level AMeta-analysisPubMed
Stem cell therapy in thin endometrium and Asherman's syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 323 on Scar, published in Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
- n = 323
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol - Level AMeta-analysisEurope PMC
Therapeutic value of mesenchymal stem cell-derived extracellular vesicles in hypertrophic and keloid scars: a systematic review and meta-analysis
Meta-analysis on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in Front Cell Dev Biol (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
Front Cell Dev Biol - Level AMeta-analysisPubMed
Efficacy and safety of autologous cell-based therapies for atrophic acne scar treatment: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis with in-depth methodological and clinical insights.
Meta-analysis with a reported sample of 500 on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in Front Cell Dev Biol (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
- n = 500
Front Cell Dev Biol - Level ASystematic ReviewEurope PMC
Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Fractional CO<sub>2</sub> Laser and Gold Microneedling Radiofrequency for Atrophic Acne Scars: A Systematic Review
Systematic Review on Chronic Wound, Scar, published in Skin Res Technol (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
Skin Res Technol - Level AMeta-analysisPubMed
Role of exosome therapy in reconstructive surgery: a review.
Meta-analysis on Chronic Wound, Scar, Immune Modulation, published in Front Med (Lausanne) (2026) — summary generated from the PubMed abstract.
- 2026
Front Med (Lausanne)1 citations