Premium
The submental flap for head and neck reconstruction: Comparison of outcomes to the radial forearm free flap
Author(s) -
Patel Urjeet A.
Publication year - 2020
Publication title -
the laryngoscope
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.181
H-Index - 148
eISSN - 1531-4995
pISSN - 0023-852X
DOI - 10.1002/lary.28429
Subject(s) - medicine , surgery , contraindication , retrospective cohort study , head and neck , paranasal sinuses , head and neck cancer , laryngectomy , larynx , radiation therapy , alternative medicine , pathology
Objectives To compare intraoperative, postoperative, functional, and oncologic outcomes of the submental island pedicled flap (SIPF) to the radial forearm free flap (RFFF). Study Design Retrospective review; comparison with statistical analysis. Methods A retrospective review was performed on patients at two tertiary care academic hospitals by a single surgeon. Consecutive patients who underwent cancer resection and reconstruction with SIPF or RFFF between 2004 and 2016 were included. Cancer staging, surgical procedure, hospital stay, complications, and functional and oncologic results were extracted. Results The study included 146 patients (57 SIPF; 89 RFFF). The most prevalent primary site was oral cavity, with a minority in the oropharynx, paranasal sinuses, or external face. Mean area of the SIPF was smaller at 28 cm 2 compared to 48 cm 2 for the RFFF. Operative time for SIPF was shorter at 6.5 hours compared to 9 hours for RFFF. Hospital stay was 8.0 days for SIPF patients and 10.0 days for RFFF patients. Multivariate analysis confirmed these differences were significant. Functional outcomes of speech quality and gastrostomy feeding tube dependence were similar between the SIPF and RFFF groups. There was no difference in local recurrence rate for SIPF (16%) and RFFF (19%), and there was no difference in overall recurrence. Kaplan‐Meier curves showed no difference in recurrence between both groups, and multivariate logistic regression demonstrated no association between SIPF and local recurrence. Conclusion Operative time and hospital stay are both significantly reduced with the SIPF. Functional and oncologic results are similar with no contraindication to the SIPF. The SIPF is a good first‐line choice for head and neck reconstruction. Level of Evidence 3 Laryngoscope , 130:S1–S10, 2020