Emilio Trignano1,2,3, Nefer Fallico2, Mario Faenza3, Corrado Rubino3, Hung-Chi Chen1. 1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, China Medical University Hospital, Taichung, 40447, Taiwan, Republic of China. 2. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, "Sapienza" University of Rome, Viale del Policlinico 151, 00161, Rome, Italy. 3. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Sassari, Viale San Pietro 43b, 07100, Sassari, Italy.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In microvascular transfer of fibular osteocutaneous flap for mandible reconstruction after cancer ablation, good bone union is necessary to allow timely radiation therapy after surgery. As the area of bone contact between fibula and the original mandible at the edge of the mandibular defect is small, a periosteal excess at both ends of the fibula covering the bone junction can be used to increase the chance of bone union. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether a periosteal excess surrounding both ends of the fibula flap can provide better blood supply and, therefore, ensure bone union and wound healing at 6 weeks after surgery and before radiation therapy initiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The transfer of fibular osteocutaneous flap with periosteal excess was only applied to reconstruct segmental mandibular defects. As a consequence, only cases in which osteotomy of fibula was not performed were included in this study. A total of 34 fibular flaps without osteotomies were performed between 2000 and 2008; 17 with and 17 without the periosteal excess. The bone union was evaluated in terms of osseous callus formation using X-rays and CT three-dimensional images at 6 weeks after surgery, and results were assessed by three independent radiologists. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between reconstructions with and without the periosteal excess in terms of bone union (P = 0.022). With reference to postoperative complications, the group reconstructed without periosteal excess presented a higher number of complications, mainly consisting of partial and total flap necrosis, respectively six (35.29%) and two (11.76%) cases. In the group reconstructed with periosteal excess, no loss of the skin island has occurred. A significant difference was observed in terms of partial flap necrosis (P = 0.024), while the other complications did not reveal a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a periosteal excess at both ends of the fibula flap provides better blood supply and is, therefore, able to ensure good bone healing and skin paddle survival regardless of the radiotherapy.
BACKGROUND: In microvascular transfer of fibular osteocutaneous flap for mandible reconstruction after cancer ablation, good bone union is necessary to allow timely radiation therapy after surgery. As the area of bone contact between fibula and the original mandible at the edge of the mandibular defect is small, a periosteal excess at both ends of the fibula covering the bone junction can be used to increase the chance of bone union. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether a periosteal excess surrounding both ends of the fibula flap can provide better blood supply and, therefore, ensure bone union and wound healing at 6 weeks after surgery and before radiation therapy initiation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The transfer of fibular osteocutaneous flap with periosteal excess was only applied to reconstruct segmental mandibular defects. As a consequence, only cases in which osteotomy of fibula was not performed were included in this study. A total of 34 fibular flaps without osteotomies were performed between 2000 and 2008; 17 with and 17 without the periosteal excess. The bone union was evaluated in terms of osseous callus formation using X-rays and CT three-dimensional images at 6 weeks after surgery, and results were assessed by three independent radiologists. RESULTS: There was a significant difference between reconstructions with and without the periosteal excess in terms of bone union (P = 0.022). With reference to postoperative complications, the group reconstructed without periosteal excess presented a higher number of complications, mainly consisting of partial and total flap necrosis, respectively six (35.29%) and two (11.76%) cases. In the group reconstructed with periosteal excess, no loss of the skin island has occurred. A significant difference was observed in terms of partial flap necrosis (P = 0.024), while the other complications did not reveal a statistically significant difference (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of a periosteal excess at both ends of the fibula flap provides better blood supply and is, therefore, able to ensure good bone healing and skin paddle survival regardless of the radiotherapy.
Authors: Irene Gallardo-Calero; Sergi Barrera-Ochoa; Maria Cristina Manzanares; Andrea Sallent; Matias Vicente; Alba López-Fernández; Matias De Albert; Marius Aguirre; Francisco Soldado; Roberto Vélez Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2019-04 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Claudius Steffen; Heilwig Fischer; Marius Sauerbrey; Thelma Heintzelmann; Jan Oliver Voss; Steffen Koerdt; Sara Checa; Kilian Kreutzer; Max Heiland; Carsten Rendenbach Journal: Dentomaxillofac Radiol Date: 2022-08-10 Impact factor: 3.525
Authors: Michael Knitschke; Sophia Sonnabend; Fritz Christian Roller; Jörn Pons-Kühnemann; Daniel Schmermund; Sameh Attia; Philipp Streckbein; Hans-Peter Howaldt; Sebastian Böttger Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2022-05-06 Impact factor: 3.109
Authors: G Succo; M Berrone; B Battiston; P Tos; F Goia; P Appendino; E Crosetti Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol Date: 2014-05-10 Impact factor: 2.503
Authors: G Colletti; L Autelitano; D Rabbiosi; F Biglioli; M Chiapasco; M Mandalà; F Allevi Journal: Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital Date: 2014-10 Impact factor: 2.124
Authors: Sarah M Moss; Monica Ortiz-Hernandez; Dmitry Levin; Chris A Richburg; Thomas Gerton; Madison Cook; Jeffrey J Houlton; Zain H Rizvi; Paul C Goodwin; Michael Golway; Beth Ripley; James B Hoying Journal: Front Bioeng Biotechnol Date: 2022-03-09