Literature DB >> 35752590

Mini-plate versus reconstruction bar fixation for oncologic mandibular reconstruction with free fibula flaps: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Nikhil Sobti1, Kaleem S Ahmed2, Thais Polanco1, Marina Chilov1, Marc A Cohen2, Jay Boyle2, Farooq Shahzad1, Evan Matros1, Jonas A Nelson3, Robert J Allen4.   

Abstract

Introduction There is currently no consensus as to the comparative complication profiles of mini-plate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB) osseous fixation in fibula flap mandibular reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare complication rates associated with the use of MP versus RB fixation for vascularized fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction of oncologic mandibular defects in an effort to better guide hardware utilization and pre-operative virtual surgical planning methods. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were queried to identify studies related to FFF-based mandibular reconstruction with either MP or RB fixation. Primary endpoints of interest were plate complications, wound infection, mal- or non-union, and total flap loss. Complication rates were calculated as weighted proportions and compared via Fisher's exact testing. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, which examined 1,513 patients. Only three studies directly compared MP fixation with RB fixation. MP fixation was used in 828 (54.7%) cases and RB fixation in 685 (45.3%) cases. MP fixation demonstrated greater rates of plate-related complications (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.01, respectively), fistula formation (15.8% versus 4.7%, p = 0.04), total flap loss (9.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.02), partial flap loss (20.6% versus 6.1%, p < 0.01), and re-operation for vascular compromise (13.3% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Rates of infection, mal-union/non-union, and wound dehiscence were similar across both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that MP use may be associated with higher rates of plate-related complications. Though limited by outcome reporting heterogeneity, this review can serve as a template for future investigations evaluating the safety profiles of MP and RB fixation in head and neck surgery.
Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Fibular free flap; Meta-analysis; Mini-plate; Osseous Fixation; Reconstruction Bar

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35752590      PMCID: PMC9391286          DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2022.04.097

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg        ISSN: 1748-6815            Impact factor:   3.022


  47 in total

1.  Hardware removal after osseous free flap reconstruction.

Authors:  Kristine E Day; Renee Desmond; J Scott Magnuson; William R Carroll; Eben L Rosenthal
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2013-11-07       Impact factor: 3.497

2.  Clinical Study of Reconstruction Plates Used in the Surgery for Mandibular Discontinuity Defect.

Authors:  Goro Kawasaki; Naomi Imayama; Izumi Yoshitomi; Kohei Furukawa; Masahiro Umeda
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2019 Jan-Feb       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  Unsurpassed reliability of free flaps for head and neck reconstruction.

Authors:  K E Blackwell
Journal:  Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  1999-03

4.  Hardware complications in oromandibular defects: Comparing scapular and fibular based free flap reconstructions.

Authors:  Gordon F Z Tsang; Han Zhang; Christopher Yao; Mirko Kolarski; Patrick J Gullane; Jonathan C Irish; Dale H Brown; Douglas B Chepeha; David P Goldstein; Ralph W Gilbert; John R de Almeida
Journal:  Oral Oncol       Date:  2017-06-27       Impact factor: 5.337

5.  Comparison of miniplates and reconstruction plates in fibular flap reconstruction of the mandible.

Authors:  Ashley B Robey; Michael L Spann; Timothy M McAuliff; Jane L Meza; Ronald R Hollins; Perry J Johnson
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2008-12       Impact factor: 4.730

6.  Postoperative complications of fibular free flaps in mandibular reconstruction: an analysis of 25 consecutive cases.

Authors:  André Chaine; Poramate Pitak-Arnnop; Michael Hivelin; Kittipong Dhanuthai; Jacques-Charles Bertrand; Chloé Bertolus
Journal:  Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod       Date:  2009-08-20

7.  Minimizing osteoradionecrosis after mandibular reconstruction and radiation in advanced head and neck cancer patients.

Authors:  Emre Gazyakan; Chih-Wei Wu; Jung-Ju Huang; Holger Engel; Ian Lee Valerio; Ming-Huei Cheng
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-08-22       Impact factor: 3.454

8.  There is no donor side specificity of fibula free flap for complex oromandibular reconstruction.

Authors:  Prabha S Yadav; Quazi G Ahmad; Vinay Kant Shankhdhar; G I Nambi
Journal:  Indian J Plast Surg       Date:  2010-07

9.  Osteoradionecrosis of mandible: Case report with review of literature.

Authors:  Ravindran Rathy; S Sunil; M Nivia
Journal:  Contemp Clin Dent       Date:  2013-04

10.  Early and late complications in the reconstructed mandible with free fibula flaps.

Authors:  Johannes T M van Gemert; Jan H Abbink; Robert J J van Es; Antoine J W P Rosenberg; Ron Koole; Ellen M Van Cann
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-02-15       Impact factor: 3.454

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.