Dataset Information

Recipient vessels for free flaps in advanced facial oncologic defects.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To prospectively compare the results of microvascular flap reconstruction of midface and scalp advanced oncologic defects using superficial temporal versus cervical as recipient vessels.

Methods

This is a parallel group clinical trial with 1:1 allocation ratio of patients who underwent midface and scalp oncologic reconstruction with free tissue flap from April 2018 to April 2022 in a tertiary oncologic center. Two groups were analyzed: those in whom superficial temporal vessels were used as the recipient vessels (Group A) and those in whom cervical vessels were used as the recipient vessels (Group B). Patient gender and age, cause and localization of the defect, flap choice for reconstruction, recipient vessels, intraoperative outcome, postoperative course, and complications were recorded and analyzed. A Fisher's exact test was used to compare outcomes between the 2 groups.

Results

On the basis of the different recipient vessels, 32 patients were randomized into 2 groups, and of these 27 patients completed the study: Group A with superficial temporal recipient vessels (n = 12) and Group B with cervical recipient vessels (n = 15). There were 18 male and 09 female patients with an average age of 53.92 ± 17.49 years. The overall flap survival rate was 88.89%. The overall complication rate for vascular anastomosis was 14.81%. The total flap loss rate in patients with superficial temporal recipient vessels was higher than the complication rate in those with cervical recipient vessels but with no statistical significance (16.67% vs. 6.66%, p = 0.569). Minor complications occurred in 05 patients without statistical significance between the groups (p = 0.342).

Conclusion

In the group with superficial temporal recipient vessels, the postoperative rate of free flap complications was similar than the cervical recipient vessel group. Therefore the use of superficial temporal recipient vessels for midface and scalp oncologic reconstruction could be a reliable option.

SUBMITTER: Sousa BA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10300290 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jul-Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Recipient vessels for free flaps in advanced facial oncologic defects.

Sousa Bruno Albuquerque BA Dias Fernando Luiz FL de Sousa Marcus A Acioly MAA Pinto Marco Antônio MA Silva Jéssica Marquet JM Cernea Cláudio Roberto CR

Brazilian journal of otorhinolaryngology 20230406 4

<h4>Objectives</h4>To prospectively compare the results of microvascular flap reconstruction of midface and scalp advanced oncologic defects using superficial temporal versus cervical as recipient vessels.<h4>Methods</h4>This is a parallel group clinical trial with 1:1 allocation ratio of patients who underwent midface and scalp oncologic reconstruction with free tissue flap from April 2018 to April 2022 in a tertiary oncologic center. Two groups were analyzed: those in whom superficial temporal ...[more]

PMID: 37329667

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction There is currently no consensus as to the comparative complication profiles of mini-plate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB) osseous fixation in fibula flap mandibular reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare complication rates associated with the use of MP versus RB fixation for vascularized fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction of oncologic mandibular defects in an effort to better guide hardware utilization and pre-operative virtual surgical planning methods. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were queried to identify studies related to FFF-based mandibular reconstruction with either MP or RB fixation. Primary endpoints of interest were plate complications, wound infection, mal- or non-union, and total flap loss. Complication rates were calculated as weighted proportions and compared via Fisher's exact testing. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, which examined 1,513 patients. Only three studies directly compared MP fixation with RB fixation. MP fixation was used in 828 (54.7%) cases and RB fixation in 685 (45.3%) cases. MP fixation demonstrated greater rates of plate-related complications (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.01, respectively), fistula formation (15.8% versus 4.7%, p = 0.04), total flap loss (9.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.02), partial flap loss (20.6% versus 6.1%, p < 0.01), and re-operation for vascular compromise (13.3% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Rates of infection, mal-union/non-union, and wound dehiscence were similar across both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that MP use may be associated with higher rates of plate-related complications. Though limited by outcome reporting heterogeneity, this review can serve as a template for future investigations evaluating the safety profiles of MP and RB fixation in head and neck surgery.

Project description:Microsurgical scalp reconstruction is indicated in patients with large scalp defects. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of scalp reconstruction in oncologic patients reconstructed with latissimus dorsi (LD), anterolateral thigh (ALT), and omental (OM) free flaps. Thirty oncologic patients underwent scalp reconstruction with LD (10), ALT (11), and OM (9) flaps. The length of the vascular pedicle, the operation time, the possibility of a two-team approach, the length of hospital stays, the complications, and the aesthetic results were evaluated. The OM flap was the flap with the shortest vascular pedicle length with a mean of 6.26 ± 0.16 cm, compared to the LD flap, which was 12.34 ± 0.55 cm and the ALT flap with 13.20 ± 0.26 cm (p < 0.05). The average time of surgery was 6.6 ± 0.14 h in patients reconstructed with OM, compared to the LD flap, which was 8.91 ± 0.32 h and the ALT flap with 7.53 ± 0.22 h (p < 0.05). A two-team approach was performed in all patients for OM flaps and ALT flaps, but only in two patients reconstructed with the LD flap (p < 0.001). In patients reconstructed with the OM flap, a very satisfactory or satisfactory result was reported in seven patients (77.8%). Eight patients reported a very unsatisfactory or unsatisfactory result with LD flap (80%) and 10 patients with ALT flap (90.9%) (p = 0.002). The mean hospital stay after surgery was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). As for complications, two patients reconstructed with OM flap, five LT flaps, and two ALT flaps developed complications, not statistically significant (p = 0.235). Omental flap, latissimus dorsi flap, and anterolateral thigh flap fulfill most of the characteristics for complex scalp reconstruction. The decision on which flap to use should be based on clinical aspects of the patients taking into account that the three flaps show similar rates of complications and length of hospital stay. Regarding the aesthetic outcome, OM flap or LD flap should be considered for reconstruction of extensive scalp defects.

Dataset Information

Recipient vessels for free flaps in advanced facial oncologic defects.

Objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Recipient vessels for free flaps in advanced facial oncologic defects.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets