Is submental flap safe for the oncological reconstruction of the oral cavity?

The contralateral based submental island flap for reconstruction of tongue and floor of mouth defects: Reliability and oncological outcome

“…Several studies have addressed the oncological safety of the SIF in head and neck reconstruction. However, the majority of those studies including our previous study have small sample sizes , and given the many factors that contribute to locoregional failure it is difficult for any of them, in our opinion, to cover and compare all these variables 26‐30 …”

“…However, the majority of those studies including our previous study have small sample sizes, and given the many factors that contribute to locoregional failure it is difficult for any of them, in our opinion, to cover and compare all these variables. [26][27][28][29][30] Tumor recurrence reported in literature, following oral cavity reconstruction using the SIF, ranges between 15.5% and 44.4%. 26,27 This wide range can be explained by the differences in sample size, patient selection, follow-up duration, and the variables looked at.…”

“…Tumor recurrence reported in literature, following oral cavity reconstruction using the SIF, ranges between 15.5% and 44.4% 26,27 . This wide range can be explained by the differences in sample size, patient selection, follow‐up duration, and the variables looked at.…”

Are contralateral submental artery perforator flaps feasible for the reconstruction of postoperative defects of oral cancer?

“…20 Submental flaps are cheaper and more convenient compared with radial forearm free flaps for oral cavity reconstruction. 21 The primary purpose of postoperative defect repair of intraoral malignant tumors is to close the oral wound, so as to help patients recover the functions of chewing, swallowing, breathing, and speech, 12 as well as prepare for the comprehensive sequential treatment of malignant tumors, so as to improve the quality of life of patients. However, in the treatment of malignant tumors, especially in cases of oral and oropharyngeal malignant tumors, whether the clinical oncological safety is reliable still needs further clinical follow-up tests to confirm.…”

“…Compared with plastic surgeons, oncologists are more concerned about the oncological safety of flaps, as the submental area is close to the primary site of head and neck tumors. Many researchers 10‐12 have supported the notion that pedicled submental flaps may be a reliable reconstruction option with appropriate management of level I lymph nodes. We thought that contralateral pedicled perforator flaps are more convincing to ensure their oncological safety.…”