Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 1 de 1
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Am J Otolaryngol ; 41(4): 102475, 2020.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32291182

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Pectoralis major muscle flaps (PMMF) are a commonly used reconstructive modality to repair head and neck defects. As the use of free flap reconstruction is increasingly practiced in the head and neck, the role of the PMMF may be changing as well. This study sought to analyze indications and outcomes for PMMF following head and neck resections from one surgeon's experience. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective review from December 1, 2013 through September 30, 2017 at a tertiary care academic medical center. Indications for the PMMF were examined as well as surgical outcomes. Basic demographic data, patient head and neck cancer history, history of radiation and/or chemotherapy, and history of previous reconstructive procedures were obtained and compared across all subjects. RESULTS: Forty patients underwent a PMMF within the designated time frame. The majority of patients were male (83%) and the average age was 65 years (range 55.4-74.6 years). Of the 40 cases, 9 of the PMMFs were performed as primary reconstruction of the defect. In the remaining 31 cases, these flaps were utilized as a secondary reconstructive option following fistula formation (13), dehiscence (6), need for an additional flap for recurrent disease (6) infection (4), or major bleeding (2). In every case that it was utilized, the PMMF was the definitive reconstruction. Within the same time frame, 429 free flaps were performed by the same surgeon, with an average of 125 free flaps performed yearly. The rate of total flap failure overall was 3.9%. The other failed free flap reconstructive options used besides a PMMF were secondary free flaps (11), local wound care (4), or obturator placement (2). The secondary pectoralis flaps occurred following 7.2% of free flaps with total or partial failure that were performed within the same time range. The indications for the PMMF did not change or evolve during the time frame of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Although free flaps were performed with far greater frequency than PMMFs at our institution, the PMMF demonstrated continued utility as a secondary reconstructive option. For a surgeon who performs a high volume of free flaps, preservation of the pectoralis muscle and associated vasculature for possible later secondary reconstruction should be considered due to its strong efficacy.


Assuntos
Retalhos de Tecido Biológico/transplante , Neoplasias de Cabeça e Pescoço/cirurgia , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Otorrinolaringológicos/métodos , Músculos Peitorais/cirurgia , Músculos Peitorais/transplante , Procedimentos de Cirurgia Plástica/métodos , Idoso , Feminino , Retalhos de Tecido Biológico/tendências , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Reoperação , Estudos Retrospectivos , Coleta de Tecidos e Órgãos , Resultado do Tratamento
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA