Dissection in the subgaleal and subperiosteal plane: Implications on scalp wound healing

Division of Plastic Surgery, Children's Hospital of Cincinnati , USA.
Journal of plastic surgery and hand surgery 04/2013; 47(3). DOI: 10.3109/2000656X.2012.748666
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Abstract Craniofacial reconstruction often involves the use of dissection in the subperiosteal or subgaleal plane to access the cranial vault and facial skeleton. Clinically, physical changes to the periosteal layer and underlying cortex were observed in the re-operative field. This article compares aspects of wound healing, structural integrity of the progenitor periosteal layer, and underlying bony changes when elevating a subgaleal or subperiosteal flap in a Lewis rat calvarial model. Cranial dissection in the subperiosteal or subgaleal plane was performed on 14 Lewis rats. En bloc resection of the calvarium and overlying soft tissue was harvested at days 0, 1, 3, 7, 14, 28, and 56. Samples underwent SEM imaging and were analysed histologically after trichrome and haematoxylin and eosin staining. One sample of native periosteum underwent cellular expansion to determine periosteal cell regenerative capability. Up to 56 days, subperiosteal dissection results in diffuse hypercellularity within the cambial layer (p < 0.001). There are irregular cortical changes at the periosteal interface and increased disorganised bone remodelling at the temporal ridges. Subgaleal dissection did not reveal any underlying bony changes, and cell counts were not significantly different from controls (p < 0.001). Subperiosteal dissection causes structural and cellular changes to the periosteum and underlying bone composition with a possible influence on its regenerative capability.

29 Reads
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Thirty years ago, the aging upper face was generally ignored by surgeons performing facial rejuvenation surgery. Ultimately, the coronal incision forehead lift technique became an accepted procedure, with most surgeons raising the forehead flap at the subgaleal plane. These surgeons found the subgaleal plane to be the "natural" or most accessible dissection plane to use, and it continues to be the most commonly used dissection plane for foreheadplasty today. However, some surgeons have begun to advocate using the subperiosteal plane, and controversy surrounds the question of which dissection plane is more surgically sound for raising a forehead flap. On the basis of 25 fresh cadaver dissections and more than 20 years of clinical experience with foreheadplasty, the author concludes that dissection done at the subperiosteal rather than the subgaleal plane provides greater benefit to the patient. Although both subgaleal and subperiosteal planes can provide relative ease of dissection, elevation of the forehead flap at the subperiosteal plane can maximally preserve blood supply for the forehead flap and predictably preserve long-term frontoparietal scalp sensation. The deep division of the supraorbital nerve, which provides sensation to the frontoparietal scalp, is placed at risk for transection with subgaleal elevation of the forehead flap. The skin incision approach chosen for the forehead flap can also affect postoperative frontoparietal scalp sensation. The deep division of the supraorbital nerve will always be transected by a coronal incision approach for forehead flap elevation, with dissection done at either the subgaleal or the subperiosteal level. Only limited scalp incisions placed to avoid the course of the deep division of the supraorbital nerve can avoid transecting this nerve, and only subperiosteal dissection of the forehead flap can predictably preserve this nerve while elevating the forehead flap.
    Plastic &amp Reconstructive Surgery 05/1999; 103(4):1326-7. DOI:10.1097/00006534-199904040-00044 · 2.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Research that involves harvesting the periosteum is common. The exact technique of harvesting is rarely described; however, it may be of vital importance because techniques may vary in their ability to raise the osteogenic cambial layer, which is reported to be tightly adherent to the underlying cortex. This study was performed to define how the cambial and fibrous layers of the periosteum are affected by different techniques of stripping. The periosteum was raised from the tibia and the humerus of adult rabbits with four stripping techniques. The stripped bone surface was examined histologically and with a scanning electron microscope to determine whether the fibrous and cambial layers of the periosteum had been removed and whether there had been damage to the underlying cortex. The results from the two anatomical sites were the same. Raising the periosteum with cortical bone chips (shingling) or with a periosteal elevator removed both layers of the periosteum and caused considerable damage to the surface of the cortex. Raising the periosteum with a sharp scalpel or by simply pulling it off removed the fibrous layer but left the osteogenic layer intact adherent to the cortex. We conclude that some techniques of periosteal elevation fail to harvest the osteogenic layer and therefore may lead to unexpected experimental results. We suggest that authors describe the exact technique of periosteal stripping that was employed.
    Journal of Orthopaedic Research 05/2000; 18(3):500-2. DOI:10.1002/jor.1100180325 · 2.99 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Endoscopic brow lift techniques using temporary fixation rely on rapid readherence of the periosteum to calvarial bone. Little is known about the histologic events that occur during the early postoperative period after these procedures. An animal study was designed to compare and contrast periosteal fixation to bone and unelevated periosteum, with endoscopic and bicoronal brow lift techniques. One method of temporary fixation is the use of absorbable (polylactic/polyglycolic acid copolymer) LactoSorb screws; a histologic analysis of implanted LactoSorb screws was also performed. Sixteen rabbits underwent brow lifts; eight underwent endoscopic brow lift and fixation with LactoSorb screws without skin excision, and another eight underwent traditional bicoronal brow lift with skin excision and closure under tension. Animals were killed 1, 2, 6, and 12 weeks after the procedures were performed to evaluate the interaction of periosteum and bone and the normal, unelevated periosteum/calvarium interface at a site distant from the operative area. Histologic specimens were examined for the degree of apposition of periosteum to bone and for any fibrous or bony reaction at this interface. Histologic analysis showed various degrees of periosteal fibrosis and fixation to calvarial bone. After an initial phase of minimal periosteal adherence and moderate inflammation, the periosteum became progressively more adherent to bone in both groups, with no significant differences between treatment groups in rates of fixation. Fixation required at least 6 weeks. LactoSorb screws were surrounded by an area of mild inflammation and were progressively hydrolyzed and digested. Periosteal fixation increases over time for bicoronal and endoscopic brow lifts with minimal differences between the two techniques. With this animal model, periosteal adherence to calvarium requires at least 6 weeks with complete adherence by 12 weeks. In addition, the use of absorbable fixation screws seems to be both effective and well tolerated. The histologic changes associated with periosteal healing observed in this study suggest that permanent or semipermanent fixation may improve the accuracy and early postoperative maintenance of forehead advancement.
    Plastic &amp Reconstructive Surgery 04/2000; 105(3):1111-7; discussion 1118-9. DOI:10.1097/00006534-200003000-00042 · 2.99 Impact Factor
Show more