Drissa Diarra, Jialiang Chen, Hao Lin, Bang Zeng, Qiwen Man, Weiwei Deng, Bushabu Fidele Nyimi, Tianfu Wu, Bing Liu
{"title":"使用髂骨瓣和腓骨瓣重建下颌骨的形态和功能分析回顾性研究","authors":"Drissa Diarra, Jialiang Chen, Hao Lin, Bang Zeng, Qiwen Man, Weiwei Deng, Bushabu Fidele Nyimi, Tianfu Wu, Bing Liu","doi":"10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102322","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This retrospective study aims to evaluate and compare the morphological and functional characteristics of mandibular reconstructions performed using iliac and fibular flaps to determine their respective effectiveness and identify the technique that offers the best patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical and imaging data were analysed from pre- and post-operative scans of 121 patients (84 with iliac flaps and 37 with fibular flaps). Mandibular reconstructions were assessed by comparing morphometric parameters (distances and angles) and symmetry between the affected and unaffected sides using Mimics software. The quality of life of patients was assessed using a modified version of the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL), version 4, which evaluates functional and psychosocial outcomes in head and neck cancer treatment RESULTS: The results show that the iliac group demonstrates significantly superior performance for distances D2 and D3 and for the CA angle on the unaffected side. In contrast, the fibular group shows no significant advantage in these parameters. Regarding symmetry, the iliac group achieves better results for distance D3, whereas the fibular group excels in angular measurements. Additionally, the iliac group maintains better stability for angle B. Regarding bone dimensions, the iliac flap better preserves alveolar base height (ABH) and width (ABW), providing more consistent and favorable outcomes than the fibular flap.No overall difference was observed between the two groups regarding quality of life (assessed using the UW-QOL questionnaire). However, specific variations were noted: the fibular group scores higher for pain, activity, and recreation, while the iliac group achieves better results in appearance and speech.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The iliac flaps are the preferred option for mandibular reconstruction, offering superior morphometric stability, better preservation of bone dimensions, and more robust structural consistency than fibular flaps. Although both techniques yield comparable overall quality-of-life results, iliac flaps demonstrate more pronounced clinical benefits, leading to optimal postoperative outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":56038,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","volume":" ","pages":"102322"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Retrospective study of morphological and functional analysis of mandibular reconstructions using iliac and fibular flaps.\",\"authors\":\"Drissa Diarra, Jialiang Chen, Hao Lin, Bang Zeng, Qiwen Man, Weiwei Deng, Bushabu Fidele Nyimi, Tianfu Wu, Bing Liu\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102322\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>This retrospective study aims to evaluate and compare the morphological and functional characteristics of mandibular reconstructions performed using iliac and fibular flaps to determine their respective effectiveness and identify the technique that offers the best patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Medical and imaging data were analysed from pre- and post-operative scans of 121 patients (84 with iliac flaps and 37 with fibular flaps). Mandibular reconstructions were assessed by comparing morphometric parameters (distances and angles) and symmetry between the affected and unaffected sides using Mimics software. The quality of life of patients was assessed using a modified version of the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL), version 4, which evaluates functional and psychosocial outcomes in head and neck cancer treatment RESULTS: The results show that the iliac group demonstrates significantly superior performance for distances D2 and D3 and for the CA angle on the unaffected side. In contrast, the fibular group shows no significant advantage in these parameters. Regarding symmetry, the iliac group achieves better results for distance D3, whereas the fibular group excels in angular measurements. Additionally, the iliac group maintains better stability for angle B. Regarding bone dimensions, the iliac flap better preserves alveolar base height (ABH) and width (ABW), providing more consistent and favorable outcomes than the fibular flap.No overall difference was observed between the two groups regarding quality of life (assessed using the UW-QOL questionnaire). However, specific variations were noted: the fibular group scores higher for pain, activity, and recreation, while the iliac group achieves better results in appearance and speech.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The iliac flaps are the preferred option for mandibular reconstruction, offering superior morphometric stability, better preservation of bone dimensions, and more robust structural consistency than fibular flaps. Although both techniques yield comparable overall quality-of-life results, iliac flaps demonstrate more pronounced clinical benefits, leading to optimal postoperative outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56038,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"102322\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102322\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Dentistry\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Stomatology Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jormas.2025.102322","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Dentistry","Score":null,"Total":0}
Retrospective study of morphological and functional analysis of mandibular reconstructions using iliac and fibular flaps.
Objective: This retrospective study aims to evaluate and compare the morphological and functional characteristics of mandibular reconstructions performed using iliac and fibular flaps to determine their respective effectiveness and identify the technique that offers the best patient outcomes.
Methods: Medical and imaging data were analysed from pre- and post-operative scans of 121 patients (84 with iliac flaps and 37 with fibular flaps). Mandibular reconstructions were assessed by comparing morphometric parameters (distances and angles) and symmetry between the affected and unaffected sides using Mimics software. The quality of life of patients was assessed using a modified version of the University of Washington Quality of Life Questionnaire (UW-QOL), version 4, which evaluates functional and psychosocial outcomes in head and neck cancer treatment RESULTS: The results show that the iliac group demonstrates significantly superior performance for distances D2 and D3 and for the CA angle on the unaffected side. In contrast, the fibular group shows no significant advantage in these parameters. Regarding symmetry, the iliac group achieves better results for distance D3, whereas the fibular group excels in angular measurements. Additionally, the iliac group maintains better stability for angle B. Regarding bone dimensions, the iliac flap better preserves alveolar base height (ABH) and width (ABW), providing more consistent and favorable outcomes than the fibular flap.No overall difference was observed between the two groups regarding quality of life (assessed using the UW-QOL questionnaire). However, specific variations were noted: the fibular group scores higher for pain, activity, and recreation, while the iliac group achieves better results in appearance and speech.
Conclusion: The iliac flaps are the preferred option for mandibular reconstruction, offering superior morphometric stability, better preservation of bone dimensions, and more robust structural consistency than fibular flaps. Although both techniques yield comparable overall quality-of-life results, iliac flaps demonstrate more pronounced clinical benefits, leading to optimal postoperative outcomes.
期刊介绍:
J Stomatol Oral Maxillofac Surg publishes research papers and techniques - (guest) editorials, original articles, reviews, technical notes, case reports, images, letters to the editor, guidelines - dedicated to enhancing surgical expertise in all fields relevant to oral and maxillofacial surgery: from plastic and reconstructive surgery of the face, oral surgery and medicine, … to dentofacial and maxillofacial orthopedics.
Original articles include clinical or laboratory investigations and clinical or equipment reports. Reviews include narrative reviews, systematic reviews and meta-analyses.
All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subjected to peer review by international experts, and must:
Be written in excellent English, clear and easy to understand, precise and concise;
Bring new, interesting, valid information - and improve clinical care or guide future research;
Be solely the work of the author(s) stated;
Not have been previously published elsewhere and not be under consideration by another journal;
Be in accordance with the journal''s Guide for Authors'' instructions: manuscripts that fail to comply with these rules may be returned to the authors without being reviewed.
Under no circumstances does the journal guarantee publication before the editorial board makes its final decision.
The journal is indexed in the main international databases and is accessible worldwide through the ScienceDirect and ClinicalKey Platforms.