[Decisional algorithm in extended neoplasms of the hypopharynx and the cervical esophagus].

M Benazzo, G Bertino, R Spasiano, P Gatti, M Capelli
{"title":"[Decisional algorithm in extended neoplasms of the hypopharynx and the cervical esophagus].","authors":"M Benazzo,&nbsp;G Bertino,&nbsp;R Spasiano,&nbsp;P Gatti,&nbsp;M Capelli","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Hypopharynx reconstruction must deal with restoration of not a simple tubed conduit but a complex arrangement of constrictive and propulsive forces with fine sensory circuits. The chosen surgical approach should guarantee both complete removal of tumor and re-establishement of the two primary functions of the district: first swallowing and then phonation. We retrospectively reviewed data of 67 patients who had undergone oncologic reconstruction of hypopharynx with either pedicled or free flaps at the ENT Department of IRCCS Policlinico S Matteo, University of Pavia, between November 1994 and July 2004. Type and extension of the defect following cancer removal guided the selection of reconstructive procedure. Partial defects, with more than 50% mucosa spared, in absence of chance of being closed primarly, were covered with radial forearm free flaps as first choice; pedicled flaps such as pectoralis major and SCM rotational flaps were used instead if free flaps contraindicated by general and/or local conditions. With circumferential defects reconstruction was accomplished by means of jejunum free flap, as first choice. Adverse local abdominal conditions mandated the alternative use of either tubulized or tunnelized fasciocutaneous free flaps, such as radial forearm and lateral thigh. When free flaps use contraindicated, or in case of salvage surgery after flap loss, pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi pedicled flap were chosen. Both reconstructions with free and pedicled flaps were successful in an high percentage of cases (>85%). Analysis of incidence and causes of flap failure are reported in this work. In the free flaps group of patients a lower rate of complications were registered, allowing a faster patient discharge from hospital (36% versus 81.3%). An oral swallowing function was gained in 92% of free flaps and 62.5% of pedicled flaps. Excellent and exclusive oral nutrition (free diet), was obtained in 54% of free flaps and 25% of pedicled flaps. None of patients undergone laryngectomy coupled in both groups with pharyngectomy achieved an intelligible esophageal speech. Only patients in the free flaps group benefitted from voice prosthesis implant: in fact this procedure was avoided in pedicled flaps due to the excessive tissue bulk. In conclusion, the data collected suggest that free flaps rapresent the first choice for both partial and total oncologic hypopharyngeal reconstruction, while pedicled flaps should be taken into account when free ones contraindicated by general or vascular conditions.</p>","PeriodicalId":84869,"journal":{"name":"I supplementi di Tumori : official journal of Societa italiana di cancerologia ... [et al.]","volume":"4 3","pages":"S190-2"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"I supplementi di Tumori : official journal of Societa italiana di cancerologia ... [et al.]","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Hypopharynx reconstruction must deal with restoration of not a simple tubed conduit but a complex arrangement of constrictive and propulsive forces with fine sensory circuits. The chosen surgical approach should guarantee both complete removal of tumor and re-establishement of the two primary functions of the district: first swallowing and then phonation. We retrospectively reviewed data of 67 patients who had undergone oncologic reconstruction of hypopharynx with either pedicled or free flaps at the ENT Department of IRCCS Policlinico S Matteo, University of Pavia, between November 1994 and July 2004. Type and extension of the defect following cancer removal guided the selection of reconstructive procedure. Partial defects, with more than 50% mucosa spared, in absence of chance of being closed primarly, were covered with radial forearm free flaps as first choice; pedicled flaps such as pectoralis major and SCM rotational flaps were used instead if free flaps contraindicated by general and/or local conditions. With circumferential defects reconstruction was accomplished by means of jejunum free flap, as first choice. Adverse local abdominal conditions mandated the alternative use of either tubulized or tunnelized fasciocutaneous free flaps, such as radial forearm and lateral thigh. When free flaps use contraindicated, or in case of salvage surgery after flap loss, pectoralis major and latissimus dorsi pedicled flap were chosen. Both reconstructions with free and pedicled flaps were successful in an high percentage of cases (>85%). Analysis of incidence and causes of flap failure are reported in this work. In the free flaps group of patients a lower rate of complications were registered, allowing a faster patient discharge from hospital (36% versus 81.3%). An oral swallowing function was gained in 92% of free flaps and 62.5% of pedicled flaps. Excellent and exclusive oral nutrition (free diet), was obtained in 54% of free flaps and 25% of pedicled flaps. None of patients undergone laryngectomy coupled in both groups with pharyngectomy achieved an intelligible esophageal speech. Only patients in the free flaps group benefitted from voice prosthesis implant: in fact this procedure was avoided in pedicled flaps due to the excessive tissue bulk. In conclusion, the data collected suggest that free flaps rapresent the first choice for both partial and total oncologic hypopharyngeal reconstruction, while pedicled flaps should be taken into account when free ones contraindicated by general or vascular conditions.

[下咽及颈部食管扩展肿瘤的诊断算法]。
下咽重建必须处理的不是一个简单的管状导管的恢复,而是一个复杂的安排的收缩和推进力与精细的感觉电路。所选择的手术入路应保证肿瘤的完全切除和该区域的两个主要功能的重建:首先是吞咽,然后是发声。我们回顾性回顾了1994年11月至2004年7月间在帕维亚大学的IRCCS Policlinico S Matteo的耳鼻喉科接受带蒂或游离皮瓣下咽肿瘤重建的67例患者的资料。肿瘤切除后缺损的类型和扩展指导了重建手术的选择。部分缺损,保留超过50%的粘膜,在没有机会完全闭合的情况下,首选桡骨前臂游离皮瓣覆盖;如果一般和/或局部情况禁止使用自由皮瓣,则使用带蒂皮瓣,如胸大肌和SCM旋转皮瓣。对于环状缺损,首选空肠游离皮瓣修复。不利的局部腹部条件要求替代使用管状或隧道式筋膜皮肤自由皮瓣,如前臂桡侧和大腿外侧。当游离皮瓣使用禁忌时,或皮瓣丢失后行补救性手术时,选择胸大肌和背阔肌带蒂皮瓣。游离皮瓣和带蒂皮瓣的重建成功率都很高(>85%)。本文对皮瓣失效的发生率及原因进行了分析。在自由皮瓣组中,患者的并发症发生率较低,允许患者更快出院(36%对81.3%)。92%的游离皮瓣和62.5%的带蒂皮瓣获得了口腔吞咽功能。54%的游离皮瓣和25%的带蒂皮瓣获得了良好的口腔营养(自由饲料)。两组患者均行喉切除术并行咽切除术,均未获得可理解的食管言语。只有自由皮瓣组的患者受益于语音假体植入:事实上,由于组织体积过大,带蒂皮瓣避免了这种手术。总之,所收集的数据表明,游离皮瓣是部分和全部肿瘤下咽重建的首选,而当游离皮瓣因一般或血管状况禁忌时,应考虑带蒂皮瓣。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信