The Path of Nasal Reconstruction: From Ancient India to the Present

ABSTRACT

Nasal reconstruction, first described over 2600 years ago in India, has undergone several modifications in its development. However, there is a misconception that this surgery began with the forehead flap repair, and the history of the subsequent two and a half millennia is poorly represented in most surgical texts. This article presents a review of the historical significance of nasal injuries in antiquity and the various technical developments along the path to modern nasal reconstruction, from ancient India through medieval Europe to modern England and America. Although written texts from 6th-century BC India through 16th-century AD Europe described pedicle flap repair of nasal defects, it was not until the late 18th century that the first written description of the forehead flap appeared. Forehead flap repair developed on an alternate pathway, being transmitted via an oral tradition, typically within families of craftsmen, at least as early as the 14th century. These ancient authors recognized the need for accurate flap design and sizing, donor site repair, precise tissue apposition, protection of the flap pedicle, hemostasis, deepithelialization of the wound, and replacement of intranasal lining. By appreciating ancient surgical techniques and examining the particular issues these procedures attempted to address, the surgeon will gain an additional and more detailed perspective of nasal reconstruction that will aid in providing excellent care to his patients.

KEYWORDS

Forehead flap - nasal reconstruction - Tagliacozzi - Sushruta - cheek flap

REFERENCES

• 1 Almast S C. History and evolution of the Indian method of rhinoplasty. In: Sanvenero-Roselli G Transactions of the Fourth International Congress of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Rome, 1969. Amsterdam; Excerpta Medica Foundation 1969
• 2 Keegan D. Rhinoplastic Operations. London; Bailliere, Tindall & Cox 1900
• 3 Nichter L S, Morgan R F, Nichter M A. The impact of Indian methods for total nasal reconstruction.  Clin Plast Surg. 1983;  10 635-647
• 4 McDowell F. Editor's commentary: ancient ear-lobe and rhinoplastic operations in India.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;  43 515
• 5 Brain D J. The Indian contribution to rhinoplasty.  J Laryngol Otol. 1988;  102 689-693
• 6 Sushruta .Sushruta Samhita. In: Bhishagratna K An English Translation of the Sushruta Samhita, Based on Original Sanskrit Text. Calcutta; Bose 1907
• 7 Goleria K S. Pedicle flaps-a historical review.  Indian J Surg. 1966;  28 247-256
• 8 Von Pfolspeundt H. Buch der Bundth-Ertznei (1460). Haeser H, Middledorpf A Berlin; Georg Reimer 1868
• 9 Gnudi M, Webster J. The Life and Times of Gaspare Tagliacozzi. Los Angeles; Zeitlin and Ver Brugge 1976
• 10 McDowell F. The Source Book of Plastic Surgery. Baltimore; Williams & Wilkins 1977
• 11 Patterson T J. Mr. Lucas and the “B.L.”  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1971;  48 68-71
• 12 McDowell F. The “B.L.” bomb-shell.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1969;  44 67-73
• 13 Carpue J C. An Account of Two Successful Operations for Restoring a Lost Nose, from the Integument of the Forehead. London; Longman 1816
• 14 Warren J M. Rhinoplastic operation.  Boston Medical and Surgical Journal. 1837;  61 69-70
• 15 Menick F J. Aesthetic refinement in use of forehead for nasal reconstruction: the paramedian forehead flap.  Clin Plast Surg. 1990;  17 607-622
• 16 Kazanjian V H. The repair of nasal defects with a median forehead flap: primary closure of forehead wound.  Surg Gynecol Oncol. 1947;  83 37-39
• 17 Millard D R. Total reconstructive rhinoplasty and a missing link.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1966;  37 167-183
• 18 Millard D R. Reconstructive rhinoplasty for the lower half of a nose.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1974;  53 133-139
• 19 Baker S R, Alford E L. Mid-forehead flaps.  Oper Tech Otolaryngol. 1993;  4 24-30
• 20 Gillies H D, Millard D R. The Principles and Art of Plastic Surgery. Boston; Little & Brown 1957
• 21 Burget G C, Menick F J. Nasal support and lining: the marriage of beauty and blood supply.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 1989;  84 189-202