Download PDF
Semin Plast Surg
DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1791562
Review Article

Challenges and Strategies in Post-Mohs Reconstructive Surgery

Lauren McAllister
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
,
James F. Thornton
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Facial reconstruction following Mohs excision presents many challenges. The unpredictable nature of Mohs surgery can yield surprising deficits that require far more extensive reconstructions than originally anticipated. It is up to the reconstructive surgeon to guide the patient through the shock of the excision, initial reconstruction, definitive reconstruction, and postoperative management. It is essential to approach a post-Mohs patient with the understanding that a rushed, same-day reconstruction carries a greater risk for the patient and the outcome than that of a delayed, planned reconstruction. Considering factors beyond the deficits, such as the patient's means, health literacy, and comorbidities, is essential to ensuring a methodical reconstruction with favorable results. Often, deficits will need to be temporized until the patient is optimized and the details of the reconstruction have been established. The specifics of the reconstruction are heavily influenced by the patient's desires, understanding, and ability to participate multistage operations. Once the best suited reconstruction is selected, reviewing expectations and the possible associated contingencies is crucial for patient satisfaction. Despite the surgeon's great effort in ensuring a satisfactory reconstruction, many patients will further benefit from close follow-up and postoperative scar management. The combination of patient optimization, meticulous surgical planning, and postoperative wound management enables the surgeon to obtain favorable outcomes, even in the most unpredictable reconstructions.

Keywords

post-Mohs reconstruction - late resections - patient optimization - BTM


Publication History

Article published online:
04 November 2024

© 2024. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sahai S, Walling HW. Factors predictive of complex Mohs surgery cases. J Dermatolog Treat 2012; 23 (06) 421-427
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Batra RS, Kelley LC. Predictors of extensive subclinical spread in nonmelanoma skin cancer treated with Mohs micrographic surgery. Arch Dermatol 2002; 138 (08) 1043-1051
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Boyle K, Newlands SD, Wagner Jr RF, Resto VA. Predictors of reconstruction with Mohs removal of nonmelanoma skin cancers. Laryngoscope 2008; 118 (06) 975-980
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Miller MQ, David AP, McLean JE, Park SS, Christophel J. Association of Mohs reconstructive surgery timing with postoperative complications. JAMA Facial Plast Surg 2018; 20 (02) 122-127
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Berens AM, Akkina SR, Patel SA. Complications in facial Mohs defect reconstruction. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2017; 25 (04) 258-264
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 van Zuylen ML, Siegelaar SE, Plummer MP, Deane AM, Hermanides J, Hulst AH. Perioperative management of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists: concerns for delayed gastric emptying and pulmonary aspiration. Br J Anaesth 2024; 132 (04) 644-648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Grande PK, Hill D, McElfresh J, Velamuri R, Liu X. Systematic review and meta-analysis of biodegradable temporizing matrix application for complex wound reconstruction. . J Burn Care Res 2024:irae081
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Grosfeld EC, Smit JM, Krekels GA, van Rappard JH, Hoogbergen MM. Facial reconstruction following Mohs micrographic surgery: a report of 622 cases. J Cutan Med Surg 2014; 18 (04) 265-270
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Chen ACY, Lin TW, Chang KC, Chang DH. Strategic use of biodegradable temporizing matrix (BTM) in wound healing: a case series in Asian patients. J Funct Biomater 2024; 15 (05) 136
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Patel P, Malik K, Khachemoune A. Patient education in Mohs surgery: a review and critical evaluation of techniques. Arch Dermatol Res 2021; 313 (04) 217-224
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Shockley WW. Scar revision techniques: z-plasty, w-plasty, and geometric broken line closure. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2011; 19 (03) 455-463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Moreno-Arias GA, Izento-Menezes CM, Carrasco MA, Camps-Fresneda A. Second intention healing after Mohs micrographic surgery. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2000; 14 (03) 159-165
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 McAllister L, Thornton JF. McAllister and Thornton. . Semin Plast Surg 2024;38(04):
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Surowitz JB, Shockley WW. Enhancement of facial scars with dermabrasion. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am 2011; 19 (03) 517-525
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Juhasz MLW, Cohen JL. Microneedling for the treatment of scars: an update for clinicians. Clin Cosmet Investig Dermatol 2020; 13: 997-1003
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Jin R, Huang X, Li H. et al. Laser therapy for prevention and treatment of pathologic excessive scars. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (06) 1747-1758
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar