Long-Term Results of a Pedicled and Innervated Sternocleidomastoid Muscle Flap to Immediately Reconstruct Superficial Parotidectomy Defects

Reconstructive flap surgery in head and neck cancer patients: an interdisciplinary view of the challenges encountered by radiation oncologists in postoperative radiotherapy

Background

Major advances have been made in reconstructive surgery in the last decades to reduce morbidity in head and neck cancer. Flaps are now present in 80% of patients with oral cavity cancer to cover anatomic, functional, and cosmetic needs. However, gaps in interdisciplinary innovation transfer from surgery to postoperative radiotherapy (poRT) remain challenging. We aimed to provide an interdisciplinary view of the challenges encountered by radiation oncologists in planning head and neck postoperative radiotherapy.

Methods

A systematic and critical review was conducted to address areas of optimization in surgery and radiology that may be relevant to poRT.

Results

Despite extensive surgical literature on flap techniques and salvage surgery, 13 retrospective series were identified, where flap outcomes were indirectly compared between surgery alone or poRT. These low-evidence studies suggest that radiotherapy accelerates flap atrophy, fibrosis, and osteoradionecrosis and deteriorates functional outcomes. Preliminary evidence suggests that tumor spread occurs at the flap-tissue junction rather than in the flaps. One prospective 15-patient study showed 31.3% vs. 39.2% flap volume reduction without or with poRT. In an international consensus, experts recognized the needs for optimized flap-sparing poRT against flap-related functional deterioration and bone damage. CT, MRI, and PET-CT modalities show potential for the delineation of the junction area between native tissues and flap for flap segmentation and to characterize flap-specific changes quantitatively and correlate them with patterns of relapse or complications.

Conclusion

Flap management in poRT is insufficiently documented, but poRT seems to damage flaps. Current gaps in knowledge underscore the need for prospective flap assessment and interdisciplinary trials investigating flap morbidity minimization by flap-sparing poRT planning.

[Complications in the surgery of the parotid salivary glands. Causes, mechanisms of development, methods of prevention]

Operations for neoplasms of the parotid salivary gland require from the surgeon a deep knowledge of the anatomical and topographic features of this area and technical skill, which puts it in a number of «jewelry» operations that require patience and concentration. The review is devoted to the topic of specific postoperative complications after parotidectomy or subtotal resection of the gland. These include relapses of tumors, paralysis or paresis of facial muscles, Frey syndrome, salivary fistulas or sialocele, violation of skin sensitivity, soft tissue deformity. The review presents the frequency and causes of complications, mechanisms of their development, methods of prevention and elimination.

Different Surgical Strategies in the Prevention of Frey Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE/HYPOTHESIS

To define the best surgical technique able to reduce Frey syndrome (FS) incidence after parotidectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

An arm-based network analysis was conducted using a Bayesian hierarchical model. The primary and secondary outcomes were the incidence of subjective (clinical) and objective (positive starch-iodine test result) FS, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 3830 patients with a median age of 50.35 years (n = 2323; IQR 44.25-54.18) were included for six interventions [temporoparietal fascia (TPFF), free fat graft (FFG), acellular dermal matrix (ADM), sternocleidomastoid muscle (SCM) flap, and superficial musculoaponeurotic system (SMAS) flap]. If compared to no treatment, the greatest reduction of subjective (clinical) FS incidence was measured for the TPFF (OR: 0.07, CI: 0.004-0.57), the ADM (OR: 0.09, CI: 0.02-0.35), and the FFG (OR: 0.11, CI: 0.03-0.42) techniques. However, a significant difference was measured also for the SCM flap (OR: 0.38, CI: 0.18-0.73) and for the SMAS flap (OR: 0.42, CI: 0.19-0.97). All treatments showed a significant reduction of the objective FS incidence if compared to no treatment (FFG, OR: 0.06, CI: 0.002-0.62; TPFF, OR: 0.07, CI: 0.01-0.33; ADM, OR: 0.11, CI: 0.03-0.44; SMAS, OR: 0.36, CI: 0.17-0.71; SCM, OR: 0.40, CI: 0.19-0.74).

CONCLUSIONS

TPFF, ADM, and FFG seem to be the best treatment strategies to prevent FS after parotidectomy. Further randomized controlled trials comparing these techniques should be conducted to define specific indications. Laryngoscope, 131:1761-1768, 2021.