RESUMEN
Background/Objectives: Perineal reconstruction after abdominoperineal excision often requires complex closures and is fraught with wound healing complications. Flap-based approaches introduce non-irradiated vascularized tissue to the area of resection to fill a large soft-tissue defect and dead space, reduce the risk of infection, and facilitate wound healing. Employing perforator flaps with their beneficial donor site properties, the authors have developed a concept of bilateral superior gluteal artery perforator (SGAP) flaps to restore extensive perineal defects. Methods: This retrospective case series was conducted between September 2015 and December 2019. We included three patients who received bilateral SGAP flap reconstruction after oncological resection. One deepithelialized SGAP flap was used for obliteration of dead space, combined with the contralateral SGAP flap for superficial defect reconstruction and wound closure. Results: Within this patient population, two male and one female patient, with a median age of 62 years (range, 52-76 years), were included. Six pedicled SGAP flaps were performed with average flap dimensions of 9 × 20 cm (range 7-9 × 19 × 21). No flap loss or no local recurrence were documented. In one case, partial tip necrosis with prolonged serous drainage was observed, which was managed by surgical debridement. No further complications were detected. Conclusions: The combination of two SGAP flaps provides maximal soft tissue for defect reconstruction and obliteration of dead space, while maintaining a very inconspicuous donor site, even with bilateral harvesting. Given these advantages, the authors recommend this promising approach for successful reconstruction of perineal defects.
RESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To reevaluate the frequency of perioperative blood transfusion, transfusion triggers, and survival impact in patients with incident, surgically treated head and neck cancer (HNC) in restrictive transfusion regimens. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of surgically treated patients with incident HNC with and without perioperative blood transfusion between 2008 and 2019 at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Medical University of Innsbruck, according to the department's clinical Head and Neck Tumor Registry. RESULTS: Of the 590 patients included, perioperative transfusions were administered in 6.3% (n = 37, transfusion group). Following multivariable logistic regression, likelihood of blood transfusions was increased in patients with poorer general health conditions (ASA score III/IV; OR 3.7; 95% CI 1.9-8.6; p = 0.002), hemoglobin <12.5 g/dL (OR 2.7; 95% CI 1.1-6.4; p = 0.03), longer duration of surgery (OR 1.006 per minute of surgery time; 95% CI 1.003-1.008; p < 0.001), and negative p16 status (OR 5.3; 95% CI = 1.1-25; p = 0.03). Based on 14 matching variables related to survival and perioperative blood transfusion, a control group of 37 matching patients without perioperative transfusion was identified. Using univariate analysis, overall survival in transfusion and control groups did not differ significantly (p = 0.25). After adjusting for four parameters with limited matching accuracy (Chi square p < 0.2) in Cox regression analysis, a transfusion related hazard ratio close to 1 (HR 0.92; 95% CI 0.34-2.51; p = 0.87) was observed. CONCLUSION: Considering current restrictive transfusion regimens and general transfusion risks, the administration of blood products in HNC patients during the perioperative period is not associated with additional oncologic hazard. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3 Laryngoscope, 133:1638-1644, 2023.