Maxillary Reconstruction Using Submental Artery Island Flap and Sagittal Mandibular Ramus/Coronoid Process Graft Pedicled With Temporalis Muscle

Mandibular reconstruction in head and neck cancer: which is the gold standard?

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review to compare the outcomes of the different surgical options for mandibular reconstruction in head and neck cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

93 articles were selected. Four groups were identified: titanium plate without flaps, titanium plate covered by soft tissue flap, bone tissue flaps and double flaps. We compared patients' characteristics, site of mandibulectomy, type of reconstruction and complications.

RESULTS

4697 patients were reported. The groups were not homogeneous regarding the type of defect and the treatment history. A significant difference in terms of post-operative complications was found between group 1 and group 2 (p < 0.00001), and between group 2 and group 3 (p < 0.00001). Total complications rate for group 4 was significantly higher when compared to group 3 (p < 0.00001), but no significant difference was found with group 2.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that mandibular reconstruction using a microvascular bone flap is the best surgical option in patients without significant comorbidities.

Quality of life in patients with cancer-related Brown IIb maxillary defect: A comparison between conventional obturation rehabilitation and submental flap reconstruction

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare the differences in quality of life (QOL) outcomes between the conventional obturator prostheses (COP) and the pedicled submental artery island flap (SAIF) in the reconstruction of Brown IIb maxillary defects.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The QOL of 116 eligible patients who had a lapse ≥ 12 months after the cancer-related maxilla ablation was evaluated by the University of Washington quality of life scale (UW-QOL), Performance Status Scale for Head and Neck (PSS-HN), and Obturator Functioning Scale (OFS).

RESULTS

Patients in the SAIF group reported statistically and clinically significant higher overall QOL scores but lower chewing scores in the UW-QOL scale when compared with those in the COP group (P < 0.05). Clinically significantly higher scores were also observed in the recreation and anxiety domains in the UW-QOL scale for the SAIF group, but there was no statistical significances. The COP group reported more complaints about the nasal leakage when swallowing and the shape of the upper lip, and had a stronger willingness to avoid family or social events in the OFS (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with Brown IIb defects, SAIF reconstruction can achieve reduced nasal leakage when swallowing, improved upper-lip contour, increased social activity, and superior overall QOL than COP. The inferior chewing function in the SAIF group indicated the need for dental rehabilitation with a conventional denture or osseointegrated implants.