Literature DB >> 16932175

Free tissue transfer: comparison of outcomes between university hospitals and community hospitals.

Jeffrey A Gusenoff1, Stephen J Vega, Shao Jiang, Amir B Behnam, Hani Sbitany, H Raul Herrera, Andrew Smith, Joseph M Serletti.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: In university hospitals, free tissue transfer has become a standard method of reconstruction for a broad spectrum of defects. Because of its complexity, free tissue transfer has not been routinely performed in a community hospital setting. This study reports the outcomes of two equal groups of free tissue transfer performed by the same surgeons, comparing the university versus the community hospital setting.
METHODS: A total of 735 free tissue transfers were performed at one university hospital and six community hospitals in our region over a 10-year study period. Outcome parameters used in this study included wound complications such as infection, dehiscence, delayed healing, hematoma, and fat necrosis.
RESULTS: A total of 674 operations were performed using 735 free tissue transfers: 386 free tissue transfers were performed at the university hospital (53 percent) and 349 (47 percent) were performed at the community hospital. Categories of free tissue transfer reconstruction included breast, lower extremity, head and neck, and upper extremity reconstructions. Most of the breast reconstructions were performed in the community hospital, whereas most of the lower extremity and head and neck reconstructions were performed at the university hospital. Fifty-one major postoperative complications occurred in the university hospital (14 percent), while 31 (10 percent) occurred in the community hospital. Complication rates did not differ significantly between settings; however, there was a trend toward more wound infections in the university hospital and more cases of fat necrosis in the community hospital, most likely reflected in the differing case mix between hospital settings.
CONCLUSION: Free tissue transfer is an effective and practical method of reconstruction that has been safely performed in both university and community hospital settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16932175     DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000233203.84078.6b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  10 in total

1.  Surgical and Patient Reported Outcomes After DIEP Breast Reconstruction at a Low-Volume Community Hospital Without Microvascular Fellowship Training.

Authors:  Kenneth K Kao; Scott M Nishikawa; Paul D Faringer
Journal:  Eplasty       Date:  2021-09-29

2.  Microvascular reconstruction for maxillofacial defects: a retrospective analysis of outcomes and complications in 121 consecutive cases.

Authors:  SeongRyoung Kim; Dong-Hun Lee; Kang-Min Ahn
Journal:  Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2020-08-26

3.  Utility of Viscoelastic Tests to Predict Flap Thrombosis: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Harsha Malapati; Philip J Hanwright; Sami H Tuffaha
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2021-08-12

4.  Free flap reconstruction for head and neck cancer can be safely performed in both young and elderly patients after careful patient selection.

Authors:  Thomas T A Peters; Sophie F Post; Boukje A C van Dijk; Jan L N Roodenburg; Bernard F A M van der Laan; Paul M N Werker; Gyorgy B Halmos
Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2014-09-13       Impact factor: 2.503

5.  Management of free flap failure in head and neck surgery.

Authors:  C Copelli; K Tewfik; L Cassano; N Pederneschi; S Catanzaro; A Manfuso; R Cocchi
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2017-10       Impact factor: 2.124

6.  Postoperative care in ICU versus non-ICU after head and neck free-flap surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Mubarak Ahmed Mashrah; Linhu Ge; Taghrid Aldhohrah; Ahmed Abdelrehem; Bahia Sabri; Hyat Ahmed; Natheer H Al-Rawi; Tian Yu; Shiyong Zhao; Liping Wang
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2022-01-06       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 7.  Salvage of failed free flaps used in head and neck reconstruction.

Authors:  Daniel Novakovic; Rajan S Patel; David P Goldstein; Patrick J Gullane
Journal:  Head Neck Oncol       Date:  2009-08-21

8.  Revisiting pedicled latissimus dorsi flaps in head and neck reconstruction: contrasting shoulder morbidities across mysofascial flaps.

Authors:  Allen L Feng; Hassan B Nasser; Andrew J Rosko; Keith A Casper; Kelly M Malloy; Chaz L Stucken; Mark E Prince; Steven B Chinn; Matthew E Spector
Journal:  Plast Aesthet Res       Date:  2021-02-25

9.  Autonomized flaps in secondary head and neck reconstructions.

Authors:  G Colletti; L Autelitano; K Tewfik; D Rabbiosi; F Biglioli
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 2.124

10.  Versatility of the supraclavicular pedicle flap in head and neck reconstruction.

Authors:  L Giordano; S Bondi; S Toma; M Biafora
Journal:  Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital       Date:  2014-12       Impact factor: 2.124

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.