{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021354933726067747, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008836524300441826, 'mean_word_length': 5.205479452054795, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Nasalis-Based V to Y Flap Versus the Bilobed Flap

Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. BACKGROUND Reconstructing defects on the nose can be challenging. The bilobed transposition flap and the nasalis-based V to Y (NBVY) flaps can be excellent repair options, each with their own advantages and disadvantages. OBJECTIVE To compare bilobed and NBVY flap scar appearances, postoperative complications, scar revision rates, flap sizes, and relative costs. MATERIALS AND METHODS We reviewed 95 cases of Mohs surgery defects on the nose repaired with either a bilobed or a NBVY flap from 2010 to 2018 at our institution. Eleven reviewers judged postoperative scar images using a modified visual analog scale. RESULTS There were no significant differences in reviewer-rated scar appearances, complication rates, or revision rates between bilobed and NBVY flaps. The NBVY flaps were 50% smaller than bilobed flaps, with significantly lower CPT billing codes. The NBVY flaps yielded better scar appearance scores compared with bilobed flaps on highly sebaceous noses. CONCLUSION The NBVY and bilobed flaps demonstrated similar scar appearance outcomes, but the NBVY flap has several advantages. Compared with the bilobed flap, the NBVY flap is smaller, less expensive, and may yield better cosmetic outcomes in patients with highly sebaceous noses.