Prognosis as a determinant of free flap utilization for reconstruction of the lateral mandibular defect

Background. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with a poor prognosis for survival were more likely to undergo reconstruction with a pectoralis flap versus a free flap and whether the use of a pectoralis flap offered any perioperative advantage, such as a reduction in medical...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Head & neck 2006-12, Vol.28 (12), p.1061-1068
Hauptverfasser: Deleyiannis, Frederic W.-B., Lee, Edward, Gastman, Brian, Nguyen, David, Russavage, James, Manders, Ernest K., Ferris, Robert L., Myers, Eugene N., Johnson, Jonas
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Background. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients with a poor prognosis for survival were more likely to undergo reconstruction with a pectoralis flap versus a free flap and whether the use of a pectoralis flap offered any perioperative advantage, such as a reduction in medical complications. Methods. Fifty‐five consecutive patients who underwent immediate reconstruction after a lateral mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. Results. Age ≥70 years (p = .03), moderate or severe comorbidity (p = .02), and involvement of the base of tongue by tumor (p = .04) were significantly associated with decreased utilization of a free flap (n = 36). Comorbidity was the main determinant of medical complications (p = .001) and length of hospital stay (p = .03). Conclusions. Expectations of prognosis bias the surgeon's decision regarding flap selection. Reconstruction with a pectoralis flap does not necessarily contribute toward the desired outcome of reduced medical complications. Any functional comparison between reconstructive groups needs to account for those differences in health status and prognosis that might explain any observed postoperative differences. © 2006 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Head Neck, 2006
ISSN:1043-3074
1097-0347
DOI:10.1002/hed.20463