Clinical, functional, and patient-reported outcomes of radial forearm versus anterolateral thigh free tissue transfer for reconstruction of glossectomy defects.

BACKGROUND: There is a lack of literature of health-related quality of life endpoints for radial forearm (RF) versus anterolateral thigh (ALT) free flap reconstruction for glossectomy defects. Our goal was to perform a comprehensive evaluation of clinical, functional, and quality of life outcomes after glossectomy reconstruction using a RF or ALT flap. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent glossectomy and immediate reconstruction with RF or ALT flaps between 2016 and 2021. Outcomes of interest included readmission and reoperation rates, functional assessments, tracheostomy and gastrostomy tube status, and FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer scores. RESULTS: Seventy-eight patients consisting of 54 RF and 24 ALT free flaps were included. ALT patients had a larger median flap size (72 vs. 48 cm2 , p = 0.021) and underwent mandibulotomy (50% vs. 7.4%, p < 0.0001) and base of tongue resection (58.3% vs. 24.1%, p = 0.005) at higher rates. No significant differences were found with respect to other outcomes. CONCLUSION: The RF and ALT flaps are suitable for glossectomy reconstruction, with minimal differences seen in postoperative outcomes. Our study suggests that ALT can be used in patients with base of tongue and larger defect sizes, while providing similar functional and clinical outcomes to RF reconstruction.

A preliminary analysis of patient reported outcomes following posterolateral mandible reconstruction: The role of flap type.

BACKGROUND: The choice of tissue type for free flap reconstruction of posterolateral mandible resections is dependent on patient and defect characteristics. We compared clinical and patient-reported outcomes following reconstruction of these defects with a soft tissue or bony free flap. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent posterolateral segmental mandibulectomy with immediate free flap reconstruction at MSKCC from 2006 to 2021. Outcomes of interest were patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) assessed by FACE-Q surveys and complications at the flap recipient site. RESULTS: Ninety patients received a bony flap and 24 patients received a soft tissue flap. Patients reconstructed with soft tissue flaps had greater rates of composite soft tissue defects (p < 0.0001), condyle resection (p = 0.001), and peripheral vascular disease (p = 0.035). Complication rates were similar between the cohorts (p > 0.05). Bony flaps scored higher on multiple FACE-Q scales: Facial Appearance (p = 0.023) Eating/Drinking (p = 0.029), Smiling (p = 0.012), Speaking (p < 0.001), Swallowing (p = 0.012), Smiling Distress (p = 0.037), and Speaking Distress (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Reconstruction of posterolateral mandibular defects has a similar complication profile when utilizing a bony or soft tissue free flap. Bony flaps may perform better with respect to PROMs. Reconstructive surgeons should consider using bony flap reconstruction to achieve higher patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Miniplate Versus Reconstruction Bar Fixation for Oncologic Mandibular Reconstruction with Free Fibula Flaps.

BACKGROUND: Fibula free flaps (FFF) are the gold standard tissue for the reconstruction of segmental mandibular defects. A comparison of miniplate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB)-based fixation of FFFs has been previously described in a systematic review; however, long-term, single-center studies comparing the two plating methods are lacking. The authors aim to examine the complication profile between MPs and RBs at a single tertiary cancer center. We hypothesized that increased components and a lack of rigid fixation inherent to MPs would lead to higher rates of hardware exposure/failure. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed from a prospectively maintained database at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center. All patients who underwent FFF-based reconstruction of mandibular defects between 2015 and 2021 were included. Data on patient demographics, medical risk factors, operative indications, and chemoradiation were collected. The primary outcomes of interest were perioperative flap-related complications, long-term union rates, osteoradionecrosis (ORN), return to the operating room (OR), and hardware exposure/failure. Recipient site complications were further stratified into two groups: early (<90 days) and late (>90 days). RESULTS: In total, 96 patients met the inclusion criteria (RB = 63, MP = 33). Patients in both groups were similar with respect to age, presence of comorbidities, smoking history, and operative characteristics. The mean follow-up period was 17.24 months. In total, 60.6 and 54.0% of patients in the MP and RB cohorts received adjuvant radiation, respectively. There were no differences in rates of hardware failure overall; however, in patients with an initial complication after 90 days, MPs had significantly higher rates of hardware exposure (3 vs. 0, p = 0.046). CONCLUSION: MPs were found to have a higher risk of exposed hardware in patients with a late initial recipient site complication. It is possible that improved fixation with highly adaptive RBs designed by computer-aided design/manufacturing technology explains these results. Future studies are needed to assess the effects of rigid mandibular fixation on patient-reported outcome measures in this unique population.

Quality of Life Outcomes after Free Fibula Flap Reconstruction of Mandibular Defects: A Longitudinal Examination.

BACKGROUND: A comprehensive understanding of changes in health-related quality of life after head and neck cancer surgery is necessary for effective preoperative counseling. The goal of this study was to perform a longitudinal analysis of postoperative quality of life outcomes after fibula free flap (FFF) mandible reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for all patients who underwent oncologic mandible reconstruction with an FFF between 2000 and 2021. Completion of at least one postoperative FACE-Q questionnaire was necessary for inclusion. FACE-Q scores were divided into five time periods for analysis. Functional outcomes measured with speech language pathology (SLP) assessments and tracheostomy and gastrostomy tube status were analyzed at three time points. RESULTS: One hundred and nine patients were included. Of these, 68 patients also had at least one SLP assessment. All outcomes as measured by the various FACE-Q scales did not improve significantly from the immediate postoperative time point to the last evaluated time point (p > 0.05). SLP functional outcomes showed some deterioration over time, but these were not significant (p > 0.05). The percentage of patients who required a tracheostomy (18 to 2%, p = 0.002) or gastrostomy tube (25 to 11%, p = 0.035) decreased significantly from the immediate postoperative time point to the last evaluated time point. CONCLUSION: Subjective quality of life outcomes do not change significantly with time after oncologic FFF mandible reconstruction. Reconstructive surgeons can use these results to help patients establish appropriate and achievable quality of life goals after surgery. Further studies are warranted to elucidate the impact of specific relevant clinical variables on postoperative quality of life.

Oral rehabilitation for patients with marginal and segmental mandibulectomy: A retrospective review of 111 mandibular resection prostheses.

STATEMENT OF PROBLEM: Treatment and timing considerations for patients seeking oral rehabilitation after marginal or segmental mandibulectomy (with osseous reconstruction) are not well understood. PURPOSE: The purpose of this retrospective review study was to report the type and timing of oral rehabilitation for mandibular defects without discontinuity and to describe additional treatment considerations for rehabilitation. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The records were reviewed of all patients who received a mandibular resection prosthesis after marginal mandibulectomy, marginal mandibulectomy with fasciocutaneous free-flap reconstruction, and segmental mandibulectomy with fibula free-flap reconstruction between 2000 and 2017 in the tertiary cancer care institution. Patients not treated by the Dental Service in the institution were excluded. The specific type of rehabilitation was noted, as was the time interval between primary surgery and prosthesis delivery. RESULTS: During the study period, 111 consecutive patients were treated by the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Dental Service for mandibular rehabilitation. Forty-three patients underwent marginal mandibulectomy, 9 patients underwent marginal mandibulectomy with fasciocutaneous free-flap reconstruction, and 59 patients underwent segmental mandibulectomy with fibula free-flap reconstruction. Most patients in all 3 groups received mandibular resection prostheses without the use of endosseous implants. Only 4 (8%) patients who had undergone marginal mandibulectomy underwent endosseous implant placement, all of which followed marginal mandibulectomy in anterior mandibular segments without free-flap reconstruction. Patients who underwent marginal mandibulectomy with fasciocutaneous free-flap reconstruction were only restored with removable mandibular resection prostheses, and none had endosseous implants. In patients who underwent segmental mandibulectomy, 13 (22%) were rehabilitated with endosseous implants. The majority in this cohort (>50%) received radiation therapy as part of their treatment. The median time to oral rehabilitation was 8 months after marginal mandibulectomy, 14 months after marginal mandibulectomy with fasciocutaneous free-flap reconstruction, and 12 months after segmental mandibulectomy with fibula free-flap reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS: Timing for oral rehabilitation may differ depending on the treatment modality followed for mandibular tumors in the patient with oral cancer. However, most patients in this cohort underwent rehabilitation with removable mandibular resection prostheses regardless of the timing of care. Endosseous implants were used infrequently, but research is needed to better understand their potential role and indication in the patient with oral cancer.

Osseous Maxillary Reconstruction with Immediate Dental Implant Placement: An Optimized Workflow for the Oncologic Patient.

INTRODUCTION: Maxillary reconstruction is a complex undertaking characterized by a 3-dimensional surgical site with deficiencies in multiple tissue types. Prior to virtual surgical planning(VSP), bony reconstruction was inaccurate and inefficient, thus reconstructions defaulted to soft tissue flaps or obturators. The current study describes an efficient and accurate approach to bony maxillary reconstruction with immediate dental implant placement(IDIP). METHODS: A reconstructive workflow was developed for osseous reconstruction to improve functional and aesthetic outcomes. Critical aspects include VSP, 3-D printed plates and IDIP. Review of a prospectively maintained database identified patients who underwent osseous maxillary reconstruction with a fibula flap and immediate dental implants from 2017-2022, with a focus on oncologic characteristics and reconstructive outcomes. RESULTS: During the study, 20 patients underwent maxillary reconstruction with VSP and IDIP. One dental implant out of 55 failed to osseointegrate and no flaps were lost. Three patients suffered partial loss of the fibula skin island; one required palatal closure with a radial forearm flap, and two were managed with outpatient debridement. Fifteen patients achieved either an interim or final retained dental prosthesis. All prostheses achieved acceptable aesthetic results without the instability associated with non-bone borne devices(e.g.dentures/obturators). No patients experienced delays in oncologic treatment. CONCLUSIONS: VSP technology has enabled surgeons to replace like with like to achieve better outcomes with acceptable morbidity for maxillary defects. IDIP provides all patients an opportunity for a fixed prosthesis even though not all complete the process. This maxillary reconstruction workflow can be safely accomplished in oncologic patients with promising and effective early results.

Mini-plate versus reconstruction bar fixation for oncologic mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Introduction There is currently no consensus as to the comparative complication profiles of mini-plate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB) osseous fixation in fibula flap mandibular reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare complication rates associated with the use of MP versus RB fixation for vascularized fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction of oncologic mandibular defects in an effort to better guide hardware utilization and pre-operative virtual surgical planning methods. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were queried to identify studies related to FFF-based mandibular reconstruction with either MP or RB fixation. Primary endpoints of interest were plate complications, wound infection, mal- or non-union, and total flap loss. Complication rates were calculated as weighted proportions and compared via Fisher's exact testing. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, which examined 1,513 patients. Only three studies directly compared MP fixation with RB fixation. MP fixation was used in 828 (54.7%) cases and RB fixation in 685 (45.3%) cases. MP fixation demonstrated greater rates of plate-related complications (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.01, respectively), fistula formation (15.8% versus 4.7%, p = 0.04), total flap loss (9.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.02), partial flap loss (20.6% versus 6.1%, p < 0.01), and re-operation for vascular compromise (13.3% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Rates of infection, mal-union/non-union, and wound dehiscence were similar across both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that MP use may be associated with higher rates of plate-related complications. Though limited by outcome reporting heterogeneity, this review can serve as a template for future investigations evaluating the safety profiles of MP and RB fixation in head and neck surgery.

An Anatomic Analysis of Fibula Flap Mandible Reconstructions: Implications for Endosseous Implant Placement.

BACKGROUND: Precise planning and evaluation of the fibula bone are necessary if immediate endosseous implant placement is considered. Limited information is available on the anatomical dimensions or density of fibula used in mandibular reconstructions. This study aimed to describe the morphology and dimensions of the fibula used to reconstruct segmental mandibular defects and contrast the findings with the native mandible. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who underwent segmental mandibulectomy reconstructed with osteocutaneous fibula flaps and had at least one postoperative computed tomography scan. Fibula cross sectional dimensions and densities were evaluated with three-dimensional software. Radiographic measurements were obtained from the contralateral mandible medial to the first molar for comparison. RESULTS: Four hundred seventy-seven fibula cross sections from 159 segments were evaluated. Cross-sectional oval, quadrilateral, triangular, and pentagonal shapes differed significantly in proportion (p < 0.001). Thirty-eight percent of segments (95 percent CI, 30 to 46 percent) had differences in cross-section height greater than 1 mm (p < 0.001). Between segments within the same patient, the median height difference was 1.58 mm (range, 0.14 to 6 mm). The superior cortex density was significantly higher for the fibula than the native mandible; however, the medullary space density was significantly lower (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The current study comprises the most comprehensive description of fibula morphology in mandibular reconstructions and highlights the significant variability that exists. The findings provide justification for the added time and cost of computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing in centers interested in performing immediate dental implant placement, as the technology provides the necessary precision and accuracy.

Immediate Dental Implant Placement in the Oncologic Setting: A Conceptual Framework.

Historically, immediate dental implants have been reserved for patients with benign disease, with full dental rehabilitation rarely being accomplished in the oncologic setting due to concerns related to implant survival, flap compromise, and delay in initiation of adjuvant therapy. Recent developments in technology have made immediate dental implants using virtual surgical planning safe and reliable. At Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, we have implemented a workflow for immediate dental implant placement in the oncologic patient population that has become a routine part of maxillary and mandibular reconstruction. This approach begins with a multidisciplinary virtual surgical planning session and custom dental splints to be used for cutting and inset guides. Dental implants are placed intraoperatively at the time of tumor resection and reconstruction with the fibula flap. A temporary prosthesis, which can be worn during radiation therapy, is placed following a vestibuloplasty, approximately 4-6 weeks after the initial reconstruction. After the completion of radiation therapy and the resolution of edema, a permanent prosthesis is placed. When critically evaluating our experience, we have found that patients undergoing immediate dental implant placement have higher rates of implant survival and no delay in adjuvant therapy. The protocol described here in detail has successfully expanded the indications for immediate dental rehabilitation in the oncologic patient population.

Virtual Surgical Planning for Oncologic Mandibular and Maxillary Reconstruction.

Virtual surgical planning (VSP) with computer-aided design and computer-aided modeling (CAD/CAM) enables the opportunity to provide personalized medicine in complex head and neck reconstruction. This innovative technology allows ablative and reconstructive surgeons to virtually create and manipulate three-dimensional anatomic models to plan both the resection and reconstruction of complicated maxillofacial defects. Studies demonstrate improvements in preoperative planning, operative efficiency and accuracy, and postoperative outcomes. VSP facilitates immediate dental implantation in selected patients, which can improve the likelihood of achieving dental restoration. This article outlines strategies for technique optimization as well as the applications, advantages and disadvantages of VSP in complex oncologic head and neck reconstruction.

Immediate dental implants in fibula free flaps to reconstruct the mandible: A pilot study of the short-term effects on radiotherapy for patients with head and neck cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The current pilot study aims to report short-term experience as it relates to acute radiotherapy treatment outcomes comparing patients with immediate dental implants in fibula free flap reconstructions to a historical cohort of patients with fibula free flap reconstructions without dental implants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent segmental mandibulectomy, reconstruction with fibula free flaps, and adjuvant radiotherapy with (n = 10) and without immediate dental implants (n = 10) at a tertiary cancer center from 2015 to 2018 was performed (IRB #17-271). Incidence of postoperative complications, time to initiation of radiation therapy, development of acute toxicity, and patient reported outcome data were recorded. The radiation plans were evaluated to identify the mean and maximum doses received by the mandible and oral cavity as well as the locations of radiation global hot spots. RESULTS: There was a similar number of postoperative complications in both cohorts, with three events in the case group and two events in the control group. Patients with dental implants reported less trismus than control patients. Evaluation of the radiation treatment plans revealed similar median radiation global hot spots in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The current study suggests that the presence of dental implants does not increase the risk of complications following surgery or during radiation treatment. Implants do not alter radiation dosimetry but do appear to positively impact early patient quality of life. Although longer follow-up is needed, based on this preliminary experience, cancer patients should be offered this type of reconstruction without fear of impacting radiation timing or delivery.

Short-Term Outcomes following Virtual Surgery-Assisted Immediate Dental Implant Placement in Free Fibula Flaps for Oncologic Mandibular Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Despite reports demonstrating feasibility of immediate dental implant placement in mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps for benign disease, this practice is not routinely used in the oncologic setting. The authors aim to demonstrate the safety of immediate dental implant placement for oncologic mandible reconstruction. METHODS: In 2017, the authors' center began immediate dental implant placement in free fibula flaps for oncologic patients undergoing mandibulectomy reconstruction. Immediate dental implant placement patients were compared to a historical cohort also reconstructed with computer-aided design and manufacturing technology beginning in 2011 (n = 34) as a noninferiority study design. Primary outcomes of interest included 90-day complications, time to radiotherapy, and time to and number of patients achieving dental restoration. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients underwent free fibula flaps following mandibulectomy using computer-aided design and manufacturing. Seventy-two dental implants were placed in the immediate dental implant placement cohort (n = 27). No differences were noted in major or minor 90-day complications between groups (p > 0.05). Radiotherapy was required in 55 percent in the immediate dental implant placement cohort versus 62 percent in the historical cohort, with no significant difference in time to radiotherapy (67.6 days versus 62.2 days, respectively). One dental implant was removed for nonosseointegration noted during vestibuloplasty. Fourteen (51.8 percent) immediate dental implant patients had complete dental restoration at 90 days compared with none in the historical cohort (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Immediate dental implant placement is a safe procedure with an unchanged short-term complication profile and no delay in radiotherapy initiation. Patients undergoing immediate dental implant placement are more likely to complete full dental rehabilitation. Long-term and health-related quality-of-life outcomes remain to be determined. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Dental Implant Survival in Vascularized Bone Flaps: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Maxillofacial reconstruction with vascularized bone restores facial contour and provides structural support and a foundation for dental rehabilitation. Routine implant placement in such cases, however, remains uncommon. This study aims to determine dental implant survival in patients undergoing vascularized maxillary or mandibular reconstruction through a systematic review of the literature. METHODS: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the literature was queried for implant placement in reconstructed jaws using Medical Subject Headings terms on PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane platforms. Weighted implant survivals were calculated for the entire cohort and subcohorts stratified by radiotherapy. Meta-analyses were performed to estimate effect of radiation on implant osseointegration. RESULTS: Of 3965 publications identified, 42 were reviewed, including 1084 patients with 3636 dental implants. Weighted implant survival was 92.2 percent at a median follow-up of 36 months. Survival was 97.0 percent in 269 implants placed immediately in 60 patients versus 89.9 percent in 1897 delayed implants placed in 597 patients, with follow-up of 14 and 40 months, respectively. Dental implants without radiotherapy exposure had better survival than those exposed to radiation (95.3 versus 84.6 percent; p < 0.01) at a median follow-up of 36 months. Meta-analyses showed that radiation significantly increased the risk of implant failure (risk ratio, 4.74; p < 0.01) and suggested that implants placed before radiotherapy trended toward better survival (88.9 percent versus 83.4 percent, p = 0.07; risk ratio, 0.52; p = 0.14). CONCLUSIONS: Overall implant survival was 92.2 percent; however, radiotherapy adversely impacted outcomes. Implants placed before radiotherapy may demonstrate superior survival than implants placed after.

Interim Implant-Supported Resection Prosthesis Following Fibula Free Flap Reconstruction of the Arch with Immediate Implants: A Novel Approach for the Oncologic Patient.

Oral cancer treatment involving the maxilla and/or mandible often results in esthetic and functional deficits that can diminish the patient's quality of life. As a result, expeditious reconstruction of the defect and dental rehabilitation is desirable. Dental rehabilitation shortly after reconstruction with an osteocutaneous free flap and resection prosthesis is a persistent challenge for patients with oncologic defects where immediate dental rehabilitation is not a possibility. Additionally, conventional prosthesis fabrication techniques are impractical or impossible due to postoperative anatomical changes and limitations in clinical armamentarium. To address these limitations, a technique and a novel implant-supported prosthetic workflow for the oncologic patient were developed to provide interim dental rehabilitation for such clinical situations. This article describes the prosthesis fabrication technique, reports short-term outcomes, and evaluates patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes using the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module.

Inset Guide for the Osteocutaneous Fibula Flap with Endosseous Implants in Oncologic Jaw Reconstruction.

Reconstruction of segmental maxillary or mandibular defects with osteocutaneous free flaps can be reliably accomplished; however, buccal or lingual rotation of the fibula during rigid fixation can render immediate endosseous implant position unusable for functional dental rehabilitation. To address this issue, a custom inset guide is introduced which utilizes surface topography of the immediately placed dental implant abutments and the patient's dentition to orient the fibula segments during inset. Use of this technique facilitates successful endosseous implant position to optimize postoperative functional rehabilitation.

Primary Leiomyosarcoma of the Mandible: Posttreatment Malocclusion Treated with an Overpartial Mandibular Resection Prosthesis.

Leiomyosarcoma is a rare malignant condition occurring in the maxillofacial region in which the mandible may be affected. Management of this tumor in the mandible may include segmental mandibulectomy, osteocutaneous fibula free-flap reconstruction, endosseous implants, and postoperative radiotherapy. Posttreatment malocclusion can be managed with an overpartial mandibular resection prosthesis. The purpose of this report is to describe the expeditious oral rehabilitation of an oncologic patient with posttreatment malocclusion, demonstrating the utility of an overpartial mandibular resection prosthesis.

Immediate Dental Implantation in Oncologic Jaw Reconstruction: Workflow Optimization to Decrease Time to Full Dental Rehabilitation.

Full dental rehabilitation following segmental mandibulectomy or maxillectomy for oncologic tumor ablation should be the goal for every patient. But despite advances in technology and reconstructive techniques, many patients do not achieve timely or complete oral rehabilitation. Recognizing this fault, we recently adopted an innovative workflow to increase the number of patients undergoing dental restoration, irrespective of tumor pathology or need for adjuvant radiotherapy. Preoperatively, every osseous jaw reconstruction undergoes virtual surgical planning to incorporate the placement of endosseous implants into the fibula osteocutaneous free flap. The dental implants are then placed intraoperatively at the time of tumor ablation and reconstruction. Four-to-six weeks following the initial surgery, the patient returns to the operating room for vestibuloplasty and exposure of the dental implants. Within 3 days of the vestibuloplasty, a temporary dental prosthesis is placed in the dental clinic, and the patient can then begin radiation therapy if needed. Following adjuvant radiation therapy, the temporary prosthesis can be replaced with a permanent one. At our institution, this innovative workflow has allowed for earlier aesthetic restoration of the jaw and greatly expanded the number of patients able to achieve oral rehabilitation. Herein, we describe this innovative workflow and provide technical pearls for successful execution.

An analysis of early oncologic head and neck free flap reoperations from the 2005-2012 ACS-NSQIP dataset.

BACKGROUND: There are limited population-based studies that examine perioperative factors that influence postoperative surgical take-backs to the OR following free flap (FF) reconstruction for head/neck cancer extirpation. The purpose of this study was to critically analyse head/neck free flaps (HNFF) captured in the ACS-NSQIP dataset with a specific focus on postoperative complications and the incidence of factors associated with re-operation. METHODS: The 2005-2012 ACS-NSQIP datasets were accessed to identify patients undergoing FF reconstruction after a diagnosis of head/neck cancer. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative risk factors were examined as covariates, and the primary outcome was return to OR within 30 days of surgery. A multivariate regression was performed to determine independent preoperative factors associated with this complication. RESULTS: In total, 855 patients underwent FF for head/neck reconstruction most commonly for the Tongue (24.7%) and Mouth/Floor/cavity (25.0%). Of these, 153 patients (17.9%) returned to the OR within 30 days of surgery. Patients in this cohort had higher rates of wound infections and dehiscence (p < 0.01). Medical complications were significantly higher and included pneumonia (12.4% vs 5.0%, p < 0.01), prolonged ventilation (16.3% vs 4.8%, p < 0.01), myocardial infarction (2.6% vs 0.6%, p = 0.017), and sepsis (7.2% vs 3.4%, p = 0.033). Regression analysis demonstrated that visceral flaps (OR = 9.7, p = 0.012) and hypoalbuminemia (OR = 2.4, p = 0.009) were significant predictors of a return to the OR. CONCLUSION: Based on data from the nationwide NSQIP dataset, up to 17% of HNFF return to the OR within 30 days. Although this data-set has some significant limitations, these results can cautiously help to improve preoperative patient optimisation and surgical decision-making.