Discontinuous Versus In-Continuity Neck Dissection in Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Tongue and Floor of the Mouth: Comparing the Rates of Locoregional Recurrence.

PURPOSE: To date, consensus has not been reached on which treatment modality, that is, in-continuity neck dissection or discontinuous neck dissection, is more appropriate for managing patients with squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) of the tongue and floor of the mouth. This study aimed to perform a meta-analysis to compare discontinuous neck dissection with in-continuity neck dissection as a treatment modality for SCC of the tongue and floor of the mouth. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The PubMed, Web of Science, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang databases were searched for articles that compared discontinuous neck dissection with in-continuity neck dissection in SCC of the tongue and floor of the mouth until March 1, 2017. The predictor variable was whether discontinuous neck dissection or in-continuity neck dissection was performed in each group. The primary outcome variable was the incidence of locoregional recurrence. Two authors individually extracted the data and assessed the study quality. The meta-analysis was performed using Stata (version 13.0; StataCorp, College Station, TX). RESULTS: We included 8 studies with 796 patients in our meta-analysis. The results showed that in-continuity neck dissection had a statistically significantly lower incidence of locoregional recurrence than discontinuous neck dissection (random-effects model: relative risk, 0.459; 95% confidence interval, 0.240 to 0.877; P = .019). Because significant heterogeneity among studies (I2 = 74.5%, P < .001) was found in the heterogeneity evaluation, a separate analysis was performed. However, the results still showed that in-continuity neck dissection had a statistically significantly lower rate of locoregional recurrence than discontinuous neck dissection in patients with T2 and T3 SCC of the tongue and floor of the mouth (fixed-effects model: relative risk, 0.281; 95% confidence interval, 0.183 to 0.433; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with discontinuous neck dissection, in-continuity neck dissection can significantly reduce the rate of locoregional recurrence in patients with SCC of the tongue and floor of the mouth.

The application of fibular free flap with flexor hallucis longus in maxilla or mandible extensive defect: a comparison study with conventional flap.

BACKGROUND: The repair and reconstruction of maxillary and mandibular extensive defects have put huge challenges to surgeons. The fibular free flap (FFF) is one of the standard treatment choices for reconstruction. The conventional FFF has deficiencies, such as forming poor oral mucosa, limited flap tissue, and perforator vessel variation. To improve the use of FFF, we add the flexor hallucis longus (FHL) in the flap (FHL-FFF). In this paper, we described the advantage and indication of FHL-FFF and conducted a retrospective study to compare FHL-FFF and FFF without FHL. METHODS: Fifty-four patients who underwent FFF were enrolled and divided into two groups: nFHL group (using FFF without FHL, 38 patients) and FHL group (using FHL-FFF, 16 patients). The perioperative clinical data of patients was collected and analyzed. RESULTS: The flaps all survived in two groups. We mainly used FHL to fill dead space, and the donor-site morbidity was slight. In FHL group, flap harvesting time was shorter (118.63 ± 11.76 vs 125.74 ± 11.33 min, P = 0.042), the size of flap's skin paddle was smaller (16.5 (0-96) vs 21.0(10-104) cm2, P = 0.027) than nFHL group. There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in hospital days, hospitalization expense, rate of perioperative complications, etc. between the two groups. Compared with FFF without FHL, FHL-FFF will neither affect the use of flap nor bring more problems. CONCLUSION: The FHL-FFF simplifies the flap harvesting operation. The FHL can form good mucosa and make FFF rely less on skin paddle. It can be used for adding flap tissue and dealing with perforator vessel variation in reconstruction of maxillary and mandibular extensive defects.