Introduction
There have been advancements in contemporary therapeutic approaches for treating malignant eyelid tumors [1]. However, it is still surgery that remains a crucial aspect of the available therapeutic options. This involves microsurgical removal of the tumor within healthy tissue, followed by a comprehensive evaluation and the subsequent restorative coverage of resulting defects. For a successful recovery, it is essential that every surgeon becomes proficient in a diverse set of reconstructive techniques, and precisely plans each step in advance. An essential prerequisite for achieving optimal reconstruction is a solid understanding of eyelid anatomy [2]. The width of the horizontal palpebral fissure is 28–30 mm, and the vertical palpebral fissure measures 10–11 mm at its broadest locations. Eyelids can be conveniently divided into two anatomical layers: the anterior lamella and the posterior lamella. A transverse grey line is visible in the middle of each lid margin, indicating the boundary between the two lamellae [2, 3]. It is essential to accurately distinguish between defects in the anterior lamella (comprising skin and orbicularis oculi muscle), the posterior lamella (including tarsus, tarsal conjunctiva, Müller, and levator muscles), and penetrating defects (Fig. 1) [2]. A comprehensive evaluation of the defect is crucial for the successful reconstruction of the eyelid. Measurements and photographs should capture both the horizontal and vertical dimensions of the lesion. Using this information, the most suitable reconstruction technique can be selected. Small defects involving less than 30% of horizontal lid length with a vertical extent of less than 8 mm can be reconstructed through direct approximation of wound edges, using the natural stretchability of the eyelid [2, 4]. Reconstruction of a defect affecting 30% to 50% of horizontal lid length with diminished stretch ability of the remaining eyelid margins (to determine the necessary tissue for reconstruction, gentle tension is applied to the medial and lateral wound edges) requires a lateral canthotomy and cantholysis [5, 6]. For defects that extend horizontally more than 50% and less than 75% of the eyelid’s length Tenzel semicircular flap technique can be performed for reconstruction of lower and upper lid defects, with its possible extension known as McGregor flap (A-Z Plasty) [7–10]. For more extensive defects up to 75% of the eyelid’s length, advanced techniques like the Hughes flap with a pedicled tarsoconjunctival flap and Mustarde cheek rotation flap (both for lower eyelid reconstruction) and the Cutler–Beard bridge flap with a pedicled cutaneomusculoconjunctival flap and Glabellar flap are appropriate (both for upper eyelid reconstruction) [2, 4, 11–13]. Alternatively myocutaneous flaps useful for both upper and lower lid defects like Fricke s flap can be suitable [2, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14–17]. When employing a free skin graft for anterior lamella reconstruction, it is essential to reconstruct the posterior lamella with a vascularized flap. If a skin flap is accessible for the anterior lamella, the posterior lamella can be reconstructed using either a vascularized flap or a graft. It is mandatory that at least one section of the eyelid remains adequately perfused [2, 11, 13, 14, 16, 18]. In cases of extensive resection it may be necessary to reconstruct additional anatomical structures, including the lateral and medial canthus, restoring the integrity of the lacrimal duct, and addressing bone structures within the orbit or paranasal sinuses [13, 19]. Management options for recontructions of bone structures within the orbit or paranasal sinuses are outside the scope of this review.
Wound closure and oculoplastic reconstructions of eyelid defects
Direct wound closure
The direct closure of the lid margin can be typically carried out for smaller penetrating defects involving less than 30% of the horizontal length of the eylid. Its objective is the reconstruction of the lid margin without a notch. This method remains commonly used in trauma-related defects that do not involve big tissue loss, and holds significant importance in everyday routine reconstructive procedures (Fig. 2).
Lateral canthotomy and cantholysis
This technique can generally be performed for most penetrating lower and upper lid defects up to 50% of the horizontal lid length The most important aspect of this technique is equalization of the lash line and reconstruction of the lid margin without a notch [5, 6] (Fig. 3).
Tarsomarginal grafts
Tarsomarginal grafts, following Hübner’s technique, provide a versatile solution and are applicable for reconstructing both the upper and lower eyelids defects of any size. The number of required tarsomarginal grafts necessary for reconstruction varies based on the size of the defect to be covered, ranging from one to three. Combining autologous tarsomarginal grafts with full-thickness skin flaps that provide blood supply can lead to highly favorable outcomes. Hübner propagates that the skin flap can play a role in nourishing the grafts, consequently minimizing the risk of necrosis. He suggests that this represents a significant advantage of the free tarsomarginal grafts technique. Additionally, he considers the ability to place multiple grafts alongside each other allowing for the reconstruction of larger defects to be another important benefit [20, 21]. Hübner highlights still another advantage compared to the Hughes flap technique, which results in an eyelash-free eyelid edge. In contrast, the technique he describes allows for the preservation of eyelashes in the reconstruction area, particularly in smaller eyelid defects. The drawback of this technique is the potential involvement of the opposite eye. Numerous patients are apprehensive about undergoing surgery on the unaffected opposite eye, as is the scenario with tarsomarginal grafts. Therefore, the patient should be actively involved in the decision-making process when weighing the options of tarsomarginal grafts versus the Hughes or Cutler–Beard bridge flap. Using free autologous tarsconjunctival grafts in conjunction with full-thickness skin flaps is an optimal approach when combined with the Hughes flap for the reconstruction of extensive lower eyelid defects. The disadvantage of the technique mentioned earlier is that the operated eye stays at least partially closed throughout a healing period of at least 3 to 4 weeks. Conditions such as low visual acuity in the opposite eye or monocular vision in the operated eye are considered contraindications. In these situations the use of other reconstructive techniques needs to be considered (Fig. 4–6).
Tenzel semicircular flap
This method enables the direct closure of lower and upper lid defects that are below 75% of the horizontal lid length. Beginning at the lateral canthus as an extension of the lid line that is to be reconstructed, the incision involving both the skin and the orbicularis oculi muscle initially extends temporally upward for lower lid reconstruction or temporally downward for upper lid reconstruction following a semicircular fashion. So a semicircular shape muscle and skin flap can be undermined and dissected [7, 8]. AZ-plasty at the termination of a Tenzel flap will bring in additional tissue from the vertical temporal region, and provide horizontal tissue to the eyelid [9, 10]. Subsequently, after performing a lateral canthotomy with cantholysis, the lid can be medially mobilized to enable the closure of lid defects. After achieving minimal tension for apposing the wound edges, the flap is anchored by its deep tissues to the periosteum of the lateral orbital rim. Consequently medial and lateral wound edges can be directly closed and the lateral cathus reconstructed (Fig. 7) [7, 8].
Advancement flap techniques
These special techniques can be utilized for significant defects that extend more than 50% of the eyelid’s horizontal length. Hughes tarsoconjunctival flap technique can be addressed for lower eyelid defects or, in the form of the Cutler–Beard cutaneomusculoconjunctival bridge flap, for the coverage of upper eyelid defects.
Hughes flap with a pedicled tarsoconjunctival flap
The Hughes tarsoconjunctival flap is a technique designed for the reconstruction of the lower eyelid defects larger than 50% of the eyelid’s length which do not extend much over the inferior border of the tarsal plate. It was first described by Wendell Hughes in 1937. This is a two-step procedure, where the posterior lamella of the lower lid is reconstructed using a pedicled tarsoconjunctival advancement flap derived from the conjunctiva and tarsus of the upper eyelid on the same side. This advancement flap, maintaining its blood supply, is sutured into the damaged area on the lower eyelid. The reconstruction of the anterior lamella involves using a free skin graft sourced from a different eyelid, such as the upper inner lid, preauricular, retroauricular, subclavicular, or a cutaneous advancement flap. This specific technique of reconstruction is regarded as a well-established method for lower eyelid reconstruction, particularly in cases of central lower eyelid defects involving residual tarsus on both medial and lateral sides, and it guarantees excellent functional and cosmetic outcomes. The advancement flap can also be dissected in conjunction with the Müller muscle. To reduce the elevated risk of upper lid retraction, it is advisable to separate the Müller muscle portion from the conjunctival pedicle whenever feasible. Alternatively, Müller muscle can be left intact and recessed at the second stage before advancing to the lower eyelid defect. The opening of the flap pedicle by separating the conjunctival bridge can be carried out around 2–4 weeks after the operation, if there is a well-established newly formed blood supply. To form a new eyelid margin, a slight incision should be made above the tarsus in the conjunctiva and then sutured to the skin graft or skin flap (Fig. 8, 9) [2, 11, 13, 18, 22–24].
Cutler–Beard bridge flap with a pedicled cutaneomusculoconjunctival flap
The Cutler–Beard bridge flap is a technique designed for the reconstruction of the upper eyelid. It was first described in 1955 by N.L. Cutler and C. Beard [25]. Penetrating defects in the upper eyelid, particularly those larger than 75% of the eyelid’s length, can be addressed through a two-step procedure using full thickness advancement pedicled cutaneomusculoconjunctival flap sourced from the lower eyelid [2, 12, 24, 26, 27]. This method provides good functional and cosmetic outcomes. Compared to several rotational and advancement flap techniques this approach offers a relatively low complication alternative [24]. The dissection of the cutaneomusculoconjunctival flap from the lower eyelid initiates with a horizontal skin incision positioned 4 mm below the line of eyelashes (1 to 2 mm beneath the lower part of the tarsal plate) at the specified width. The two vertical segments of the flap are directed downward towards the conjunctival fornix. The flap is subsequently maneuvered in a cranial direction beneath the intact bridge of the lower eyelid. Complementary structures are sutured to each other in three layers in a interrupted fashion [24, 25] (Fig. 10, 11, and 12A–C) [24]. If the defect spans more than 75% of the eyelid’s width, extra tissue can be employed to enhance stabilization. Donor sclera, ear cartilage, fascia lata, hard palate, or free tarsal grafts from the contralateral upper eyelid can serve as supplementary stabilizing tissues for this repair. Without additional stabilizing tissue the likelihood of various postoperative eyelid malpositions, such as upper eyelid entropion, rises [21, 22, 24, 28–32]. 4–6 weeks following the surgery, when the development of new lymphatics and the stretching of the inverted lower eyelid flap are fully accomplished, the transection of the flap pedicle can be carried out. To achieve this, the lower eyelid bridge is pulled back using a strabismus hook. After the pedicle is cut, the upper eyelid conjunctiva is moved forward onto the lid margin by 2 mm to reduce the likelihood of corneal erosions. The flap pedicle is subsequently reattached into the lower eyelid defect, consistent with the layers [24, 25]. The most severe complication of this procedure is the necrosis of the lower eyelid bridge. The disadvanteges of this technique include lower eyelid ectropion, upper eyelid entropion, skin and lanugo hairs of the new eyelid rubbing on the cornea (the levator tends to pull the new posterior lamella more than the new anterior lamella) and lymphedema. The method is inappropriate for patients with monocular vision or infants due to the risk of amblyopia [24, 25].
Glabellar transposition flap
The initial description of the glabellar flap was provided by McCord and Wesley [21]. It includes forming an inverted “V” in the glabellar area, subsequently converting it into a “Y” shape to enable the rotation of the flap, providing tissue for the repair of the upper lid anterior lamella with medial canthal defect [33–35]. The glabellar flap (GF) presents numerous benefits, such as a close match in color and texture to the recipient site and minimal occurrence of morbidity at the donor site. One disadvantage is its tendency to bring the eyebrows closer together. Another drawback is that it fails to provide a natural depth to the medial canthus and leads to a bulky nasal bridge. This can be overcome by avoiding a too broad base to the flap between the eyebrows, and performing a meticulous thinning of the flap if needed (Fig. 13) [34].
The Fricke flap
The Fricke flap is a lateral forehead transposition flap with a single pedicle based on the temporal region, originally introduced by Jochim Fricke in 1829 [36]. It is applicable for the restoration of substantial defects in the lower lid, upper lid, and lateral canthal region, or to introduce a vascularized tissue to address anterior orbital defects. While some surgeons recommend it as a final alternative for periorbital reconstruction, the Fricke flap is a valuable choice for reconstructing the anterior lamella in the lateral canthus, upper, and lower lids.
This technique is very usefull in cases of lower lid defects that span the entire length of the lower lid but are relatively short in their vertical dimension, and especially beneficial in cases with monocular vision, where techniques like the Hughes or Cutler–Beard flaps, which obstruct the visual axis/that disable vision, are not preferable. It is suitable for reconstructing a substantial lower eyelid defect, providing an alternative to the more intricate dissection required for a Mustardé cheek rotation flap, which may come with the associated risk of facial nerve injury (Fig. 14) [17, 37].
Mustarde cheek rotation flap
This method is indicated for the reconstruction of large defects of the lower eyelid up to its whole length, especially in cases with a significant vertical component extending into the cheek area. The biggest advantage of this technique is its capability to reconstruct all layers of the eyelid in a single step, making it especially well-suited for individuals with monocular vision (Fig. 15) [15, 16, 37]. For substantial resections, there might be a need to reconstruct additional anatomical structures, such as the lateral and medial canthus, ensuring the integrity of the lacrimal duct. Reconstructing the lacrimal ducts is necessary for processes involving the medial lid angle with lacrimal drainage system involvement. The choice of reconstruction method, such as bicanalicular intubation or conjunctivorhinostomy with Jones tube (CDCR), depends on the type and extent of damage [19, 38]. In the case of a lower eyelid defect involving the lower lacrimal canaliculus, simultaneous application of bicanalicular silicone intubation (Crawford Intubation System) is possible during tumor removal surgery (Fig. 16) This involves identifying the entry to the severed lower lacrimal canaliculus and inserting the stent, followed by intubation of the upper canaliculus. Under endoscopical guidance the stent is brought out into the nasal cavity. However, this procedure requires general anesthesia and the surgeon’s expertise in using both — the Crawford Intubation System and nasal endoscope. After wound healing and stent removal, the entry to the lower lacrimal canaliculus is located near or in the medial canthus. In such cases, monocanalicular intubation (e.g., Mini-Monoka) is not feasible due to the absence of the lacrimal puntctum and the inability to anchor the stent in the ampulla of the lower lacrimal canaliculus. The function of the altered anatomy of the lacrimal canaliculus is somewhat impaired afterwards [19, 38]. If the removal of the lower eyelid tumor is performed without intubation of the lower lacrimal canaliculus, and the upper canaliculus is preserved, tearing is usually not present at rest. The difference between the eyes (the healthy one and the one after the removal of the lower eyelid tumor) becomes apparent when exposed to increased irritating factors on the eye (wind, temperature changes, etc.). However, this is not an indication for conjunctivodacryocystorhinostomy, as this procedure rarely provides complete relief of tearing [39, 40]. In cases where the defect after tumor removal involves the entire medial canthus, and tearing is pronounced, consideration may be given to lacrimal bypass surgery (CDCR). The operation is performed after complete healing of the wound from tumor removal. It involves creating a connection between the conjunctival sac and the nasal cavity, using lacrimal duct prosthesis — a Jones tube. Currently, the StopLoss Jones Tube system is most commonly used, and the surgery can be performed through an external or endoscopic approach [19] (Fig. 17, 18).
Postoperative complications
Complications may arise following any surgical procedure. Potential undesirable outcomes of surgery include postoperative bleeding, hematomas, wound infections, wound healing disorders and necrosis. Occasionally, wound healing disorders or increased wound tension may result in the dehiscence of the wound or eyelid edge. Smaller dehiscences of the lower eyelid can be allowed to undergo secondary granulation, while bigger ones can be addressed through gentle wound resurfacing with minimal wedge excision, if required, followed by re-suturing. Overlapping of wound edges, everted wound margins, asymmetries, retractions, and hypo- or hypertrophic scars can undergo surgical correction, if necessary, once the initial scar healing is fully completed. Photographic documentation before and after the surgery can be beneficial in this process.
Conclusion
The eyes serve as a central focus for facial aesthetics, making the achievement of satisfactory cosmesis in reconstruction a crucial requirement. An oculoplastic surgeon trained in the fields of aesthetic, plastic and reconstructive surgery specializing in the face, orbits, eyelids and lacrimal system is responsible for the recognition and evaluation of the occuring alterations. Surgery planning should always be customized and tailored to individual expectations of the patient. For a successful recovery, it is crucial for every surgeon to excel in diverse reconstructive techniques and meticulously plan each step in advance.
Acknowledgements
Not applicable.
Conflict of interests
Authors declare no conflict of interests.
Author contributions
P.J.G., R.R., B.F., A.L., M.N. and R.N. conceptualized, drafted, read, and approved the final version of the manuscript.
Funding
No funding.