Comparison of radial forearm with fibula and scapula osteocutaneous free flaps for oromandibular reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To compare our experience with the osteocutaneous radial forearm free flap (group 1) (n = 108) with other commonly used osteocutaneous free flaps (group 2) (n = 56) such as the fibula and scapula in single-stage oromandibular reconstruction. DESIGN: Retrospective case review. SETTING: Tertiary-care academic medical center. PATIENTS: One hundred sixty-three consecutive patients who underwent 164 mandibular reconstructions with osteocutaneous free flaps. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment of preoperative and intraoperative variables for both groups. We compared recipient-site complication rate, intensive care unit stay, total hospital stay, and postoperative function. RESULTS: The most common donor site used was the radius (n = 108 [66%]), followed by the fibula (n = 36 [22%]) and scapula (n = 20 [12%]). Mean follow-up was 29 months (range, 1-116 months). Group 2 patients had larger soft tissue and/or bony defects. Surgical and medical complication rates and major donor site morbidity in group 1 were similar or better when compared with those in group 2. The lengths of the intensive care unit (4 vs 7 days; P = .009) and hospital stays (13 vs 15 days; P = .06) were shorter in group 1. Although the microvascular success rate was similar in both groups, the local wound complication rate was significantly better for group 1. The difference for the length of intensive care unit stay was statistically significant and potentially amounts to more than 6000 dollars of savings. Functional outcomes, including the ability to tolerate oral diet, tracheostomy presence, and dental rehabilitation, were similar between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The primary site long-term morbidity, donor site morbidity, and postoperative function of osteocutaneous radial forearm free flaps are comparable to those of other commonly used osteocutaneous free flaps such as the fibula and scapula when used in single-stage oromandibular reconstruction.

The role of the osteocutaneous radial forearm free flap in the treatment of mandibular osteoradionecrosis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of the osteocutaneous radial forearm free flap (OCRFFF) in the treatment of mandibular osteoradionecrosis (ORN). STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective case review of patients who underwent OCRFFF oromandibular reconstruction after resection of nonviable tissue at an academic tertiary care center because of ORN. Patients with reconstructions other than OCRFFF were excluded from this study. RESULTS: Nine patients underwent a composite oromandibular resection for ORN with a reconstruction using an OCRFFF between April 1998 and February 2003. All patients had failed previous less aggressive surgical and medical management of the ORN. Mean follow-up was 36 months (range, 14-67 months). There were no flap failures or significant immediate postoperative or long-term complications observed. All patients had successful restoration of mandibular integrity and continuity, with 100% success rate of stabilization of ORN. All patients were able to tolerate PO diet, with only one third having to supplement their diet with gastrostomy feedings, compared with 89% gastrostomy dependence preoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Primary or adjuvant radiotherapy for head and neck malignancies can result in ORN of the mandible. This difficult problem often requires surgical intervention. In our experience, the OCRFFF can be successfully used for oromandibular reconstruction, even in the setting of the heavily radiated tissue with excellent postoperative outcomes. SIGNIFICANCE: This is the first study that demonstrates the efficacy of the OCRFFF as a treatment of mandibular ORN.

Radiation-induced malignancy of the head and neck.

OBJECTIVE: Our goal was to evaluate our experience with radiation-induced malignancy (RIM), compare that experience to the literature, and review treatment modalities. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: The setting is the University of Kansas Medical Center. A retrospective review was performed to identify patients with RIM. Patients were included if they met the criteria for RIM as delineated in the literature. RESULTS: Thirteen patients met the criteria for RIM. The mean latency period was 22 years. Sarcomas were the most common type of RIM and the paranasal sinuses were the most common location. Surgical resection was our treatment of choice. CONCLUSIONS: Our patient series differs from previous reports in that sarcomas were the predominating RIM and the paranasal sinuses were the most common location. We noted a shorter latency period than has been previously published. Surgical excision is the treatment of choice. EBM RATING: C.

Use of the 2.0-mm locking reconstruction plate in primary oromandibular reconstruction after composite resection.

OBJECTIVE: To review our experience with 2.0-mm locking reconstruction plate (LRP) system for patients requiring oromandibular reconstruction. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective case review of 43 consecutive patients who underwent mandibular composite resection with immediate reconstruction. SETTING: Tertiary care center. RESULTS: Forty-three patients underwent oromandibular reconstruction with the 2.0-mm mandibular LRP system and free flaps containing vascularized bone. Mean follow-up was 11 months. There were no intraoperative difficulties utilizing this system. Two (5%) patients had partial fasciocutaneous flap loss resulting in plate exposure. There were no instances of plate fracture or complications requiring plate removal to date. CONCLUSION: 2.0-mm LRP mandibular system is reliable even in the setting of previous or adjuvant radiation therapy. Its technical ease of application, contouring malleability, and very low profile have proven to be advantageous in oromandibular reconstruction. SIGNIFICANCE: No previous descriptions of use of the 2.0-mm LRP in combination with osteocutaneous free flaps for mandibular reconstruction are found in the literature. EBM RATING: C.

Reconstruction of the hard palate using the radial forearm free flap: indications and outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Although prosthetic obturation is the "gold standard" for restoration of hard-palate defects, obturators can be problematic. We present 10 cases of palatal reconstruction with the radial forearm free flap and compare patient satisfaction with defect-matched patients rehabilitated with prosthetic obturation. METHODS: Twelve patients who underwent radial forearm free flap (RFFF) reconstruction of a hard-palate defect and eight patients, with similar-sized defects who were rehabilitated with a prosthetic obturator, were evaluated for donor site and recipient site complications, diet, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: All the patients in both groups were able to resume an unrestricted diet with normal mastication and articulation. Both groups achieved equivalent satisfaction scores with regard to appearance, chewing, and taste; however, the patients reconstructed with an RFFF reported higher satisfaction scores in speech, comfort, convenience, and social interaction. CONCLUSIONS: RFFF reconstruction of hard-palate defects provides a functional alternative to conventional prosthetic obturators.