Keystone design perforator island flap in facial defect reconstruction

Facial defect coverage is a common subject in the field of reconstructive surgery.There are many methods for facial defect reconstruction,and reconstructive surgeons should choose the most appropriate method on a case-by-case basis to achieve both functional and aesthetic improvement.Among various options for facial reconstruction,the local flap technique is considered the best reconstructive modality to provide good tissue matches of color and texture,which is consistent with the ideal goal of reconstruction(replacement of like-with-like).Keystone design perforator island flap(KDPIF),devised by Behan in 2003,has been applied to various fields of reconstructive surgery in the past decade due to its design simplicity,robust vascular supply,and reproducibility.Several studies have reported KDPIF reconstruction of facial defects,such as large parotid defects,small-to-moderate nasal defects,and eyelid defects.However,KDPIF has been used relatively less in facial defects than in other body regions,such as the trunk and extremities.The purpose of this review is to provide an organized overview of facial KDPIF reconstruction including the classification of KDPIF,modifications,physiology,mechanism of flap movement,consideration of facial relaxed skin tension lines and aesthetics,surgical techniques,clinical applications,and precautions for successful execution of KDPIF reconstruction.

Rhomboid Flap vs. Keystone Perforator Island Flap (KPIF) in the Treatment of Pilonidal Sinus Disease: Comparison of Short-Term Results

Background: Pilonidal disease is a chronic inflammatory disease of the sacrococcygeal region that mainly affects young people. Its incidence is 26 cases per 100,000 persons. Although many techniques have been described, there is no consensus on the treatment of pilonidal sinus disease (PSD). Materials and Methods: This study included 30 patients with PSD who were treated between May 2014 and September 2017. All cases underwent excision and flap reconstruction. The operative time, postoperative complications, the length of hospital stay, painless sitting and walking time, patient satisfaction and recurrence were evaluated prospectively. Results: The results of this prospective, randomized and comparative study are based on experience of a single surgical centre. All patients were followed up 18 months after discharge from the hospital. There is a difference in surgery durations (minutes) between the two groups (33.86 ± 2.89 min. in “keystone” flap vs. 41.26 ± 4.19 in the “rhombic” flap group) (p = 0.001). There were no significant differences in the length of hospital stay, painless sitting and walking time or patient satisfaction. The total complication rate was 66.6% after rhomboid flap compared with 6.6% after keystone flap. There was no flap necrosis. Conclusions: Both of these methods have shown to be successful in treatment of PSD. The KPIF is associated with the advantages of very simple design, abundant blood supply from the perforator vessels and lower rate of complication.