Reconstruction of medium-size defects of the oral cavity: radial forearm free flap vs facial artery musculo-mucosal flap.

IF 2.2
Badr Ibrahim, Akram Rahal, Eric Bissada, Apostolos Christopoulos, Louis Guertin, Tareck Ayad
{"title":"Reconstruction of medium-size defects of the oral cavity: radial forearm free flap vs facial artery musculo-mucosal flap.","authors":"Badr Ibrahim, Akram Rahal, Eric Bissada, Apostolos Christopoulos, Louis Guertin, Tareck Ayad","doi":"10.1186/s40463-021-00523-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The radial forearm free flap (RFFF) is the most commonly used flap for defects of the oral cavity. The facial artery musculomucosal (FAMM) is a safe and effective method to reconstruct medium sized defects of the oral cavity. No comparison exists between the FAMM flap and RFFF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>1) Retrospective chart review from 2007 to 2016. 2) Cost difference analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Thirteen FAMM flap cases and 18 RFFF met inclusion criteria. The FAMM flap showed a tendency to lower rates of return to the operating room (p = 0.065) as well as lower rates of complications not requiring return to the OR with 1 complication in 1 patient as opposed to 10 patients with 15 complications (p = 0.008). Also, FAMM flap had shorter operative times compared to the RFFF group (7.2HR and 8.9 HR respectively, p = 0.002). The average operative room related costs for a FAMM flap were 6510 CAD vs 10,703 CAD for RFFF (p < 0.0005). Speech and swallowing outcomes were similar (p > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The FAMM flap can be used for reconstruction of medium-size defects of the oral cavity with functional outcomes similar to the RFFF while decreasing the associated costs and morbidity.</p>","PeriodicalId":520683,"journal":{"name":"Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale","volume":" ","pages":"67"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8643000/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = Le Journal d'oto-rhino-laryngologie et de chirurgie cervico-faciale","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s40463-021-00523-z","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

Background: The radial forearm free flap (RFFF) is the most commonly used flap for defects of the oral cavity. The facial artery musculomucosal (FAMM) is a safe and effective method to reconstruct medium sized defects of the oral cavity. No comparison exists between the FAMM flap and RFFF.

Methods: 1) Retrospective chart review from 2007 to 2016. 2) Cost difference analysis.

Results: Thirteen FAMM flap cases and 18 RFFF met inclusion criteria. The FAMM flap showed a tendency to lower rates of return to the operating room (p = 0.065) as well as lower rates of complications not requiring return to the OR with 1 complication in 1 patient as opposed to 10 patients with 15 complications (p = 0.008). Also, FAMM flap had shorter operative times compared to the RFFF group (7.2HR and 8.9 HR respectively, p = 0.002). The average operative room related costs for a FAMM flap were 6510 CAD vs 10,703 CAD for RFFF (p < 0.0005). Speech and swallowing outcomes were similar (p > 0.05).

Conclusion: The FAMM flap can be used for reconstruction of medium-size defects of the oral cavity with functional outcomes similar to the RFFF while decreasing the associated costs and morbidity.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

前臂桡骨游离皮瓣与面动脉肌粘膜皮瓣重建中等大小口腔缺损的比较。
背景:桡骨前臂游离皮瓣(RFFF)是修复口腔缺损最常用的皮瓣。面动脉肌粘膜修复术是修复中等大小口腔缺损的一种安全有效的方法。FAMM皮瓣与RFFF没有可比性。方法:1)2007 - 2016年回顾性图表复习。2)成本差异分析。结果:13例FAMM皮瓣和18例RFFF符合纳入标准。FAMM皮瓣显示出较低的返回手术室率(p = 0.065)以及较低的并发症发生率,1例患者出现1个并发症,而10例患者出现15个并发症(p = 0.008)。FAMM皮瓣的手术时间较RFFF组短(分别为7.2HR和8.9 HR, p = 0.002)。FAMM皮瓣的平均手术室相关费用为6510加元,RFFF为10703加元(p < 0.05)。结论:FAMM皮瓣可用于修复中等大小的口腔缺损,其功能效果与RFFF相似,同时降低了相关费用和发病率。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书