Outcomes after free tissue transfer for composite oral cavity resections involving skin

Is Supraclavicular Artery Island flap (SAI) a viable alternative to Free Tissue Transfer (FTT) in head and neck reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The aim of this study is to compare the outcomes of Supraclavicular Artery Island (SAI) Flap versus Free Tissue Transfer for head and neck reconstruction.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of MEDLINE (via PubMed), Scopus and Cochrane Library database according to the PRISMA guidelines. Only comparative studies between the two techniques were included. Random-effects model meta-analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Eight studies, reporting a total of 402 patients and same number of flaps, 165 of which underwent reconstruction using supraclavicular artery island flap and 237 reconstructed with free tissue transfer were identified. No statistically significant differences were observed regarding major complications, total flap necrosis, partial flap necrosis, post operative fistula formation, donor site dehiscence, recipient site dehiscence and total flap area.

CONCLUSION

Supraclavicular artery island flap and free tissue transfer seem to be comparable when used in head and neck reconstruction.

Segmental mandibular reconstruction in patients with poor lower extremity perfusion, vessel-depleted necks and/or profound medical frailty

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Options for segmental mandibular reconstruction in patients poorly suited to undergo fibula free flap (FFF).

RECENT FINDINGS

Although FFF is the current 'gold standard' for segmental mandibular reconstruction, other reconstructive options must be considered when FFF is contraindicated or disfavoured and/or patient frailty precludes a lengthy anaesthetic. In addition to various nonvascularized and soft tissue only reconstructions, excellent osseous free flap alternatives for functional segmental mandibular reconstruction may be employed. The subscapular system free flaps (SSSFF) may be ideal in frail and/or elderly patients, as SSSFF allows for early mobility and does not alter gait. In extensive and/or symphyseal defects, functional mandibular reconstruction in lieu of a free flap is extremely limited. Pedicled segmental mandibular reconstructions remain reasonable options, but limited contemporary literature highlights unpredictable bone graft perfusion and poor long-term functional outcomes.

SUMMARY

There are several excellent free flap alternatives to FFF in segmental mandibular reconstruction, assuming adequate cervical recipient vessels are present. On the basis of the current literature, the optimal mandibular reconstruction for the medically frail, elderly and/or patients with extreme vessel-depleted necks is limited and debatable. In qualifying (i.e. limited, lateral) defects, soft tissue only reconstructions should be strongly considered when osseous free flaps are unavailable.

Socioeconomic Influences on Short-term Postoperative Outcomes in Patients With Oral Cavity Cancer Undergoing Free Flap Reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations between median household income (MHI) and area deprivation index (ADI) on postoperative outcomes in oral cavity cancer.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review (2000-2019).

SETTING

Single-institution tertiary medical center.

METHODS

MHI and ADI were matched from home zip codes. Main postoperative outcomes of interest were length of tracheostomy use, length of hospital stay, return to oral intake, discharge disposition, and 60-day readmissions. Linear and logistic regression controlled for age, sex, race, body mass index, tobacco and alcohol use history, primary tumor location, disease staging at presentation, and length of surgery. A secondary outcome was clinical disease staging (I-IV) at time of presentation.

RESULTS

The cohort (N = 681) was 91.3% White and 38.0% female, and 51.7% presented with stage IV disease. The median age at the time of surgery was 62 years (interquartile range [IQR], 53-71). The median MHI was $47,659 (IQR, $39,324-$58,917), and the median ADI was 67 (IQR, 48-79). ADI and MHI were independently associated with time to return of oral intake (β = 0.130, P = .022; β = -0.092, P = .045, respectively). Neither was associated with length of tracheostomy, hospital stay, discharge disposition, or readmissions. MHI quartiles were associated with a lower risk of presenting with more advanced disease (Q3 vs Q1: adjusted odds ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.32-0.97]).

CONCLUSION

MHI is associated with oral cavity cancer staging at the time of presentation. MHI and ADI are independently associated with postoperative return to oral intake following intraoral tumor resection and free flap reconstruction.

Supraclavicular Artery Island Flap: Critical Appraisal and Comparison to Alternate Reconstruction

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

The supraclavicular artery island (SAI) flap may be a good option for selected head and neck reconstruction due to its reliability, ease of harvest, and favorable color match. The objective of this study was to examine the rates of complications for the SAI flap in head and neck oncologic reconstruction, with examination of risk factors and comparisons to alternative flaps often considered the gold-standard soft-tissue flaps for head and neck reconstruction: the pectoralis myocutaneous (PMC), radial forearm free flap (RFFF), and anterolateral thigh (ALT) flaps.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

METHODS

Consecutive SAI flaps were compared to PMC, RFFF, and ALT flaps (non-SAI flap group), all performed by the senior author from 2010 to 2018. The non-SAI flaps were included if an SAI flap could have been performed as an alternate flap. The groups were compared based on demographics, flap dimensions, site of reconstruction, operating time, total hospital stay, total hospital costs, and complications.

RESULTS

One hundred seven SAI flaps and 194 non-SAI flaps were identified. SAI flaps were used less commonly than non-SAI flaps for mucosal defects (P < .001). The SAI flap dimensions were narrower but longer than non-SAI flaps (P < .001). SAI flaps had higher rates of total complications, partial flap necrosis, flap dehiscence at the recipient site, fistula, donor site dehiscence, and minor complications compared to non-SAI flaps (all P < .05). SAI flaps had higher rates of total complications, recipient site dehiscence, fistula, and minor complications in both the oral cavity and all mucosal sites compared to non-SAI flaps (all P < .05). SAI flaps for mucosal reconstruction were associated with higher rates of total complications (54% vs. 34%, P = .04), flap dehiscence at the recipient site (32% vs. 14%, P = .03), and major complications (21% vs. 5%, P = .02), compared to cutaneous reconstruction. Complications were equivalent between SAI flaps and non-SAI flaps for cutaneous reconstruction (all P > .05). Multivariate analysis showed that SAI flaps were associated with any postoperative complication (odds ratio [OR]: 3.47, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.85-6.54), partial flap necrosis (OR: 5.69, 95% CI: 1.83-17.7), flap dehiscence (OR: 5.36, 95% CI: 2.29-12.5), donor site complications (OR: 11.6, 95% CI: 3.27-41.0), and minor complications (OR: 5.17, 95% CI: 2.42-11.0). Within the SAI flap group, SAI flap length >24 cm was associated with postoperative complications on multivariate analysis (OR: 5.09, 95% CI: 1.02-25.5, P = .048).

CONCLUSIONS

The SAI flap is best suited for cutaneous reconstruction of the face, neck, and parotid/temporal bone regions due to the favorable color match; the thin, pliable nature of the skin; ease of harvest; and equivalent complication rates compared to alternate soft-tissue flaps. However, the SAI flap is associated with more complications for oral cavity and mucosal site reconstruction when compared to RFFF and ALT flaps and should be used in selected cases that do not require complex folding. For all sites, flaps longer than 24 cm should be used with caution.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

3 Laryngoscope, 2020.