Perioperative Outcomes in Patients Who Underwent Fibula, Osteocutaneous Radial Forearm, and Scapula Free Flaps

Author:

Bollig Craig Allen1,Walia Amit2,Pipkorn Patrik2,Jackson Ryan2,Puram Sidharth V.2,Rich Jason T.2,Paniello Randy C.2,Zevallos Jose P.2,Stevens Madelyn N.3,Wood C. Burton4,Rohde Sarah L.3,Sykes Kevin J.5,Kakarala Kiran5,Bur Andres5,Wieser Margaret E.6,Galloway Tabitha L. I.6,Tassone Patrick6,Llerena Pablo1,Bollig Kassie J.7,Mattingly Tyler R.8,Pluchino Tyler8,Jorgensen Jeffrey Brian9

Affiliation:

1. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, New Jersey

2. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Washington University in St Louis, St Louis, Missouri

3. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tennessee

4. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Tennessee Health Science Center, Memphis

5. Department of Otolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City

6. Department of Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia

7. Department of Biostatistics, Epidemiology, and Informatics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

8. Department of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery and Communicative Disorders, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky

9. Division of Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery, PRISMA Health, Greenville, South Carolina

Abstract

ImportanceStudies comparing perioperative outcomes of fibula free flaps (FFFs), osteocutaneous radial forearm free flaps (OCRFFFs), and scapula free flaps (SFFs) have been limited by insufficient sample size.ObjectiveTo compare the perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent FFFs, OCRFFFs, and SFFs.Design, Setting, and ParticipantsThis cohort study assessed the outcomes of 1022 patients who underwent FFFs, OCRFFFs, or SFFs for head and neck reconstruction performed at 1 of 6 academic medical centers between January 2005 and December 2019. Data were analyzed from September 17, 2021, to June 9, 2022.Main Outcomes and MeasuresPatients were stratified based on the flap performed. Evaluated perioperative outcomes included complications (overall acute wound complications, acute surgical site infection [SSI], fistula, hematoma, and flap failure), 30-day readmissions, operative time, and prolonged hospital length of stay (75th percentile, >13 days). Patients were excluded if data on flap type or clinical demographic characteristics were missing. Associations between flap type and perioperative outcomes were analyzed using logistic regression, after controlling for other clinically relevant variables. Adjusted odds ratios (aORs) with 95% CIs were generated.ResultsPerioperative outcomes of 1022 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.7 [14.5] years; 676 [66.1%] men) who underwent major osseous head and neck reconstruction were analyzed; 510 FFFs (49.9%), 376 OCRFFFs (36.8%), and 136 SFFs (13.3%) were performed. Median (IQR) operative time differed among flap types (OCRFFF, 527 [467-591] minutes; FFF, 592 [507-714] minutes; SFF, 691 [610-816] minutes). When controlling for SSI, FFFs (aOR, 2.47; 95% CI, 1.36-4.51) and SFFs (aOR, 2.95; 95% CI, 1.37-6.34) were associated with a higher risk of flap loss than OCRFFFs. Compared with OCRFFFs, FFFs (aOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.07-2.91) were associated with a greater risk of fistula after controlling for the number of bone segments and SSI. Both FFFs (aOR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.27-2.46) and SFFs (aOR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.05-2.69) were associated with an increased risk of 30-day readmission compared with OCRFFFs after controlling for Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score and acute wound complications. Compared with OCRFFFs, FFFs (aOR, 1.78; 95% CI, 1.25-2.54) and SFFs (aOR, 1.96; 95% CI, 1.22-3.13) were associated with a higher risk of prolonged hospital length of stay after controlling for age and flap loss.Conclusions and RelevanceFindings of this cohort study suggest that perioperative outcomes associated with OCRFFFs compare favorably with those of FFFs and SFFs, with shorter operative times and lower rates of flap loss, 30-day readmissions, and prolonged hospital length of stay. However, patients undergoing SFFs represented a more medically and surgically complex population than those undergoing OCRFFFs or FFFs.

Publisher

American Medical Association (AMA)

Subject

Otorhinolaryngology,Surgery

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

1. Free Flap Donor Sites in Head and Neck Reconstruction;Otolaryngologic Clinics of North America;2023-08

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3