Bilateral Harvesting of a Fibula Free Flap: Assessment of Morbidity.

PURPOSE: To investigate morbidity related to harversting of bilateral fibula free flap for head and neck reconstruction using subjective and functional tests. METHODS: Patients were retrospectively evaluated using point evaluation system (PES) and balance evaluation systems test (BESTest) questionnaires to assess morbidity related to surgery. RESULTS: Five patients were enrolled in the study. Mean PES scores was 22.2 over 24. Mean overall function assessed with BESTest was 77.6%, and the results were poorest for section I. Sections V and VI had scores of 88% and 83%, respectively, indicating that the sensory balance and gait stability of the patients were compromised only minimally. CONCLUSION: Bilateral harvesting of the fibula free flap is not associated with an increase in long-term morbidity and does not lead to significant functional impairments. Therefore, this procedure should be considered safe, and can be performed without concern regarding morbidity, when bone reconstruction with a fibula free flap is indicated.

A critical assessment of the fibula flap donor site.

BACKGROUND: The free fibula flap has become popular for mandibular reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to propose comprehensive functional assessments of the donor site. METHODS: Thirty free fibula flaps for mandible reconstruction were prospectively enrolled in the study. Objective assessments included isokinetic testing of the ankle joint, electromyographic examination of the superficial peroneal nerve (SPN), and preoperative and postoperative foot scans. The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used to subjectively assess the donor site. RESULTS: The isokinetic values of the donor side showed a significant decrease 1 year postoperatively. The results of the electromyographic test of the SPN were categorized as 3 types. The plantar center pressure shifted to the heel on the donor side 6 months postoperatively. The aesthetic outcome was satisfactory. CONCLUSION: The functional parameters of the donor site indeed declined in our assessments. Further refinements in the surgical technique are needed to improve the donor site status. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck 39: 279-287, 2017.

Is a computer-assisted design and computer-assisted manufacturing method for mandibular reconstruction economically viable?

The design and manufacture of patient-specific mandibular reconstruction plates, particularly in combination with cutting guides, has created many new opportunities for the planning and implementation of mandibular reconstruction. Although this surgical method is being used more widely and the outcomes appear to be improved, the question of the additional cost has to be discussed. To evaluate the cost generated by the management of this technology, we studied a cohort of patients treated for mandibular neoplasms. The population was divided into two groups of 20 patients each who were undergoing a 'traditional' freehand mandibular reconstruction or a computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing (CAD-CAM) mandibular reconstruction. Data concerning operation time, complications, and days of hospitalisation were used to evaluate costs related to the management of these patients. The mean operating time for the CAD-CAM group was 435 min, whereas that for the freehand group was 550.5 min. The total difference in terms of average time gain was 115.5 min. No microvascular complication occurred in the CAD-CAM group; two complications (10%) were observed in patients undergoing freehand reconstructions. The mean overall lengths of hospital stay were 13.8 days for the CAD-CAM group and 17 days for the freehand group. Finally, considering that the institutional cost per minute of theatre time is €30, the money saved as a result of the time gained was €3,450. This cost corresponds approximately to the total price of the CAD-CAM surgery. In conclusion, we believe that CAD-CAM technology for mandibular reconstruction will become a widely used reconstructive method and that its cost will be covered by gains in terms of surgical time, quality of reconstruction, and reduced complications.