Intraoral versus transcervical approaches in mandibular reconstruction with free flaps: A retrospective study

被引:1
作者
Wang, Zhuo [1 ,2 ]
Miao, Dongqing [1 ,2 ]
Wan, Jinbo [1 ,2 ]
Ding, Xu [1 ,2 ]
Song, Xiaomeng [1 ,2 ]
Wu, Heming [1 ,2 ]
Yuan, Hua [1 ,2 ]
Du, Yifei [1 ,2 ]
Wang, Yuli [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Nanjing Med Univ, Jiangsu Key Lab Oral Dis, Nanjing 210029, Peoples R China
[2] Nanjing Med Univ, Affiliated Hosp Stomatol, Dept Oral & Maxillofacial Surg, Nanjing 210029, Peoples R China
基金
中国国家自然科学基金;
关键词
Intraoral approach; Transcervical approach; Segmental mandible reconstruction; Free fibula flap; OUTCOMES; SURGERY;
D O I
10.1016/j.jcms.2022.09.003
中图分类号
R78 [口腔科学];
学科分类号
1003 ;
摘要
This study aims to investigate the clinical and functional differences between intraoral and transcervical approaches for segmental mandible resection and reconstruction with free flaps. Patients diagnosed as benign and low-grade mandibular malignant tumors without neck dissections were retrospectively reviewed and divided into intraoral and transcervical groups. Patients of intraoral group underwent intraoral mandibulectomy and vascular anastomosis was performed through a 2-cm submandibular incision, while traditional submandibular approach was used in transcervical group. Clinical character-istics of two groups were assessed including body mass index (BMI), defect types and number of fibular segments, as well as perioperative variables such as operation time, blood loss, drainage volume. The score of appearance, swallowing and speech using the University of Washington Quality of Life Ques-tionnaire (UW-QOL) was recorded and analyzed 6-month postoperatively.A total of 14 patients in intraoral group and 21 patients in transcervical group was collected, respectively. In intraoral group, intraoperative blood loss and postoperative drainage volume were significantly reduced in comparison with transcervical group (p = 0.0146, p = 0.0017; respectively). The score of appearance was 87.50 +/- 12.97 in intraoral group, which was significantly higher than 64.29 +/- 12.68 in transcervical group (p < 0.0001). Similar results were found in patients of subtype Class II mandibular defect between two groups. However, patients of intraoral group had a significant increase in operative time and a comparable amount of intraoperative blood loss (p = 0.0472, p = 0.1434; respectively).Within the limitations of the study it seems that an intraoral approach combined with a 2-cm submandibular incision should be preferred over a transcervical approach for segmental man-dibulectomy and free flap reconstruction whenever appropriate.(c) 2022 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:771 / 777
页数:7
相关论文
共 21 条
  • [11] Computer-Assisted versus Conventional Freehand Mandibular Reconstruction with Fibula Free Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Ince, Bilsev
    Ismayilzade, Majid
    Dadaci, Mehmet
    Zuhal, Erdem
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 146 (05) : 686E - 687E
  • [12] The transcervical incision for use in oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures
    Landa, LE
    Tartan, BF
    Aguz, A
    Skouteris, CA
    Gordon, C
    Sotereanos, GC
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2003, 61 (03) : 343 - 346
  • [13] The Latest Evolution in Virtual Surgical Planning: Customized Reconstruction Plates in Free Fibula Flap Mandibular Reconstruction
    Lee, Z-Hye
    Alfonso, Allyson R.
    Ramly, Elie P.
    Kantar, Rami S.
    Yu, Jason W.
    Daar, David
    Hirsch, David L.
    Jacobson, Adam
    Levine, Jamie P.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 146 (04) : 872 - 879
  • [14] Subtotal Mandible Reconstruction with a Free Fibula Flap and No Skin Incisions
    Lim, Soobin
    Mulloy, Clairissa D.
    Stern-Buchbinder, Zachary
    St Hilaire, Hugo
    Stalder, Mark W.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2020, 8 (07)
  • [15] Mandibular Reconstruction Using Intraoral Microvascular Anastomosis Following Removal of an Ameloblastoma
    Nkenke, Emeka
    Agaimy, Abbas
    von Wilmowsky, Cornelius
    Eitner, Stefan
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2013, 71 (11) : 1983 - 1992
  • [16] Computer-Assisted versus Conventional Free Fibula Flap Technique for Craniofacial Reconstruction: An Outcomes Comparison
    Seruya, Mitchel
    Fisher, Mark
    Rodriguez, Eduardo D.
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2013, 132 (05) : 1219 - 1228
  • [17] Expanded Transoral Microvascular Mandibular Reconstruction: A Scar-Free Approach
    Sun, Jian
    Li, Jun
    Lv, Ming Ming
    Wang, Liang
    Gupta, Anand
    Shen, Yi
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2022, 80 (06) : 1115 - 1126
  • [18] The New Age of Three-Dimensional Virtual Surgical Planning in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery
    Tepper, Oren
    Hirsch, David
    Levine, Jamie
    Garfein, Evan
    [J]. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2012, 130 (01) : 192E - 194E
  • [19] Mandibular reconstruction with the vascularized fibula flap: comparison of virtual planning surgery and conventional surgery
    Wang, Y. Y.
    Zhang, H. Q.
    Fan, S.
    Zhang, D. M.
    Huang, Z. Q.
    Chen, W. L.
    Ye, J. T.
    Li, J. S.
    [J]. INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY, 2016, 45 (11) : 1400 - 1405
  • [20] Patient-Reported Aesthetic and Psychosocial Outcomes After Microvascular Reconstruction for Head and Neck Cancer
    Zebolsky, Aaron L.
    Patel, Neil
    Heaton, Chase M.
    Park, Andrea M.
    Seth, Rahul
    Knott, P. Daniel
    [J]. JAMA OTOLARYNGOLOGY-HEAD & NECK SURGERY, 2021, 147 (12) : 1035 - 1044