Utility and versatility of the supraclavicular artery island flap in head and neck reconstruction

Effect of 2 Teams and Operative Time on Complications After Oral Cavity Free Flap Reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate the effects of operative time and 2 team approach on complications after soft tissue free flap reconstruction for oral tongue cancer.

METHODS

Patients with oncologic glossectomy with myocutaneous or fasciocutaneous free flap reconstruction were included from the 2015 to 2018 American College of Surgery National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. The primary predictive variables assessed were operative time and 2 team approach; control variables included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), 5-question-modified frailty index (mFI-5), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class, and total work relative value units (wRVU). Outcomes assessed included 30-day mortality, 30-day reoperation, hospital length of stay beyond 30 days, readmission, medical and surgical complications, and non-home discharge. Multivariable logistic/linear regression models were used to predict surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Microvascular soft tissue free flap reconstruction of the oral cavity after glossectomy was performed on 839 patients. Operative time was independently associated with readmission, prolonged length of stay, surgical complications, medical complications, and non-home discharge. A 2-team approach was independently associated with prolonged length of stay and medical complications. The mean operative time of the 1-team and 2-team approach was 8.73 and 9.13 hours. The 1-team approach did not significantly increase operative time (P = .16).

CONCLUSIONS

In the largest study to date of operative time on post-surgical outcomes after glossectomy and soft tissue free flap reconstruction, we found longer operative times increased rates of postoperative complications and non-home discharge. The 1-team approach is non-inferior to the 2-team approach with respect to operating time and complications.

Reconstruction of Adult Tubular Esophageal Duplication with Supraclavicular Artery Island Flap: A Rare Case Presentation

Adult esophageal duplication (ED) is a rare congenital anomaly that is rarely encountered in clinical practice. There have been only a few reported cases of adult tubular esophageal duplication. A patient presented with symptoms of odynophagia and dysphagia. Upon examination, gastroscopy and X-ray contrast imaging revealed the formation of a fistula in the upper esophagus that connected to a sinus tract running along the esophagus. After managing the initial infection, an open surgery was performed. The esophageal tubular duplication was removed and the defect was reconstructed using a supraclavicular artery island (SAI) flap. The post-operative recovery was uneventful and the patient's odynophagia and dysphagia were relieved. In conclusion, ED can be effectively diagnosed through esophagogram and gastroscopy. Surgical excision is currently the preferred treatment option, and the use of the SAI flap technique shows great promise in reconstructing the esophageal defect after surgery.

Pedicled Supraclavicular Artery Island Flap Versus Free Radial Forearm Flap: Perioperative Outcomes in Head and Neck Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Radial forearm free flap (RFFF) and supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) are some of the most common fasciocutaneous flaps used for head and neck (H&N) reconstruction.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of clinical data and outcomes of 31 consecutive patients who underwent H&N reconstruction using either SCAIF or RFFF over a three-year period, aiming to compare the surgical outcomes of the SCAIF and the RFFF in H&N reconstruction.

RESULTS

Thirty-two flaps were performed in 31 patients (17 SCAIFs and 15 RFFFs). There was no difference in patient demographics between both groups. Hospital stay was longer in the SCAIF group (30.7 ± 18.2 days (min: 9/max: 60) versus 19.2 ± 15.8 days (min: 7/max: 72). Patients who underwent reconstruction with a SCAIF had shorter reconstructive procedure time; 74.4 min (min: 60/max: 93) versus 147.8 min (min: 140/max: 187). Overall morbidity was not significantly different (SCAIF 52.7% vs RFFF 39.9%, p = NS). Global flap survival was higher without statistical significance in the RFFF group (100%) versus the SCAIF group (70.7%).

CONCLUSION

Despite the advantages related to the use of SCAIF like regarding the time spent in the reconstructive procedure. In our experience, the RFFF continues to be the most successful technique with similar perioperative outcomes and fewer complication rates. In this vein, both techniques can be reasonably used to reconstruct post-ablative H&N defects. However, in our experience, the use of SCAIF may lengthen hospital length of stay probably due to the augmented risk of flap failure.

Supraclavicular Artery Island Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction: A Case Series and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

Supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) is emerging as an efficient and reliable flap for various complex head and neck defects after tumor extirpation.

OBJECTIVE

To examine a series of cases using a SCAIF for head and reconstruction at our institution.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of 8 patients who underwent SCAIF reconstruction of various head and neck defects from 2015 to 2018 at our institution. We also reviewed the English-language literature of reports of a SCAIF used for head and neck defects.

RESULTS

Eight patients underwent SCAIF reconstruction of head and neck defects. Various anatomic sites were reconstructed including the neck (n = 4), oral cavity (n = 1), and parotid/lateral skull base (n = 3). Two patients had partial flap necrosis, requiring débridement and wound care. There was no total loss of the flap or donor-site complication.

CONCLUSION

SCAIF is an excellent choice for reconstructing various head and neck defects, with low complication rates and donor-site morbidity. The outcomes of our SCAIF reconstruction are comparable to previously published outcomes.