Objective To explore the clinical application effects of portable visual retractor in superficial temporal fascia flap harvesting. Methods From January 2010 to June 2019, 27 patients meeting the inclusion criteria and planning to perform operation of superficial temporal fascia flap harvesting were admitted to the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery of the First Clinical Medical Center of the People′s Liberation Army General Hospital. The patients were divided into traditional surgical method group [6 males and 3 females, aged (34±14) years], cold light source retractor group [6 males and 4 females, aged (35±16) years], and portable visual retractor group [7 males and 1 female, aged (30±14) years] according to way of superficial temporal fascia flap harvesting. The superficial temporal fascia flaps of patients in traditional surgical method group were resected by traditional way of resection, and the superficial temporal fascia flaps of patients in cold light source retractor group and portable visual retractor group were resected at assistance of cold light source retractor and portable visual retractor, respectively. Length of incision, operation time, intraoperative blood loss volume, postoperative drainage volume, and postoperative complication of patients in 3 groups were observed and recorded. Data were processed with Fisher′s exact probability test, one-way analysis of variance, least significant difference test, Kruskal-Wallis

test, and Bonferroni correction. Results The length of incision of patients in visual retractor group was (3.6±0.8) cm, significantly shorter than (12.6±1.6) cm in traditional surgical method group and (5.8±0.9) cm in cold light source retractor group (

<0.05). The incision length of patients in traditional surgical method group was significantly longer than that in cold light source retractor group (

<0.05). The operation time of patients in visual retractor group was 24.0 (23.3, 25.8) min, significantly shorter than 35.0 (30.5, 36.5) min in traditional surgical method group and 28.5 (26.8, 30.5) min in cold light source retractor group (

=16.5, 9.8,

<0.05). The operation time of patients in traditional surgical method group was significantly longer than that in cold light source retractor group (

=6.6,

<0.05). The intraoperative blood loss volume was (26±3) mL of patients in visual retractor group, significantly less than (34±4) mL in traditional surgical method group and (30±6) mL in cold light source retractor group (

<0.05). The intraoperative blood loss volume of patients in traditional surgical method group was significantly more than that in cold light source retractor group (

<0.05). The postoperative drainage volumes of patients in visual retractor group, cold light source retractor group, and traditional surgical method group were (33±4), (34±6), and (31±7) mL, respectively, and there were no significantly statistical differences in postoperative drainage volumes among patients in the three groups (

=0.3,

>0.05). There were no severe complications such as ischemia and necrosis of superficial temporal fascia flaps in patients of the three groups. One patient in cold light source retractor group had subcutaneous hematoma after operation, which was improved by removing stitches and hematoma. Conclusions Superficial temporal fascia flap harvesting at the assistance of portable visual retractor has the advantages of clear visual field, simple operation, short operation time, small incision, and less intraoperative blood loss.