The free vascularized flap and the pectoralis major pedicled flap options: Comparative results of reconstruction of the tongue

Mallet, Y.; Bedoui, Sophie El; Penel, Nicolas; Van, J. Ton; Fournier, Charles; Lefebvre, Jean‐Louis

doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.05.639

Cited by 44 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We found that patients who received reconstruction with ALTFF had a longer operative duration when compared with those who were reconstructed with PMMF (475 ± 128 vs 565 ± 107 min), which was a similar finding to that reported in previous studies (14,15). The need for microvascular anastomosis is may be the main reason for the longer duration of procedure.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cancer patients-A quality of life analysis

Yan¹,

Zhu²,

Cai³

et al. 2013

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to compare the differences between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps (ALTFF) and pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF) for reconstruction in oral cancer patients. Method and Patients: who received free flap or PMMF reconstruction after ablation surgeries were eligible for the current study. The patients’ demographic data, medical history, and quality of life scores(Medical Outcomes Study-Short Form-36 (MOS SF-36) and the University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QOL) questionnaires were collected. Results: 81 of 118 questionnaires were returned (68.64%). There was signiﬁcant differences between two groups in the gender (P<0.005). Patients reconstructed with ALTFF had better appearance domains and better shoulders domains, in addition to better role emotion domains. Conclusions: Using either PMMF or ALTFF for reconstruction of oral defects after cancer resection signiﬁcantly inﬂuences a patient’s quality of life. Data from this study provide useful information for physicians and patients during their discussion of reconstruction modalities for oral cancers. Key words:Quality of life, ALTFF,PMMF, oral cancer.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Comparison between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cancer patients-A quality of life analysis

Yan¹,

Zhu²,

Cai³

et al. 2013

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similar findings have also been reported by Hsing et al 9) and Mallet et al 10) . Chepeha et al 11) demonstrated that patients undergoing pedicled flap reconstructions had longer hospital stays than patients receiving free flaps.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Infrahyoid Myocutaneous Flap Versus Radial Forearm Free Flap in Treating Patients with cT1-2 Tongue Carcinoma

Fang

Luo

Zhao

et al. 2015

J. Hard Tissue Biology.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our goal was to compare clinical and functional results of the infrahyoid myocutaneous flap (IMF) with those of the radial forearm free flap (RFFF) for partial tongue reconstruction. Between January 2005 and June 2012, patients who had received an IMF or a RFFF reconstruction for cT1-2 tongue carcinoma were included, their medical records were reviewed, and they were asked to complete the University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QoL) version 4 questionnaire at least 12 months postoperatively. Compared to patients with a RFFF reconstruction, patients treated with an IMF had significantly shorter operation time (p<0.001), less hospital cost (p<0.001) and shorter postoperative stay (p<0.001). There were no apparent differences in other scales between the two groups. The mean composite score for the two groups was 88.4 (SD: 14.9) and 86.4 (SD: 15.3), respectively, the finding was not significant (p=0.784). Patients with an IMF reconstruction had significantly better shoulder function, there were no significant differences regarding other domains between the two groups. Compared to RFFF, IMF was a reliable procedure for partial tongue reconstruction.

show abstract

“…However, with the development of microvascular techniques and the wide use of free tissue transfers, drawbacks of the PMMF were magnified and its popularity in head and neck reconstruction decreased in the recent decades. Disadvantages of the PMMF include excessive bulk in some situations, deformity of the thoracic wall, function impairment of the neck and shoulder, high incidence of complications and partial necrosis of its skin paddle, and possibly poor function outcome of the recipient site13678910. The PMMF is now popularized in developing countries with limited medical resources51112, whereas it is used much less in Western countries where availability of microsurgical techniques is more widespread31314.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Pectoralis Major Myocutaneous Flap for Head and Neck Defects in the Era of Free Flaps: Harvesting Technique and Indications

Liu

Yang

et al. 2017

Sci Rep

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The role of the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF) in head and neck reconstruction is challenged recently due to its natural drawbacks and the popularity of free flaps. This study was designed to evaluate the indications and reliability of using a PMMF in the current free flap era based on a single center experience. The PMMF was harvested as a pedicle-skeletonized flap, with its skin paddle caudally and medially to the areola, including the third intercostal perforator, preserving the upper one third of the pectoralis major muscle. The harvested flap was passed via a submuscular tunnel over the clavicle. One hundred eighteen PMMFs were used in 114 patients, of which 76 were high-risk candidates for a free flap; 8 patients underwent total glossectomy, and 30 underwent salvage or emergency reconstruction. Major complications occurred in 4 patients and minor complications developed in 10. Tracheal extubation was possible in all cases, while oral intake was possible in all but 1 case. These techniques used in harvesting a PMMF significantly overcome its natural pitfalls. PMMFs can safely be used in head and neck cancer patients who need salvage reconstruction, who are high risk for free flaps, and who need large volume soft-tissue flaps.

show abstract

The free vascularized flap and the pectoralis major pedicled flap options: Comparative results of reconstruction of the tongue

Cited by 44 publications

References 36 publications

Comparison between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cancer patients-A quality of life analysis

Comparison between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cancer patients-A quality of life analysis

Infrahyoid Myocutaneous Flap Versus Radial Forearm Free Flap in Treating Patients with cT1-2 Tongue Carcinoma

Pectoralis Major Myocutaneous Flap for Head and Neck Defects in the Era of Free Flaps: Harvesting Technique and Indications

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About