Free versus pedicled flaps for reconstruction of head and neck cancer defects: a systematic review
Abstract Objective The present review focuses on comparative studies of reconstruction with free flaps (FF) versus pedicled flaps (PF) after oncologic resection. Method A systematic review was developed in compliance with PRISMA guidelines and performed using the Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, Amed and Bi...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SAGE Publishing
2019-03-01
|
| Series: | Journal of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://link.springer.com/article/10.1186/s40463-019-0334-y |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract Objective The present review focuses on comparative studies of reconstruction with free flaps (FF) versus pedicled flaps (PF) after oncologic resection. Method A systematic review was developed in compliance with PRISMA guidelines and performed using the Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, Amed and Biosis databases. Results A total of 30 articles were included. FF are associated with a longer operative time, a higher cost and a higher incidence of postoperative revisions compared to PF. FF are associated with a longer stay at the intensive care unit than the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) and with a more extended hospital stay compared to the submental island flap (SMIF). FF are associated with fewer infections and necrosis compared to the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF). Conclusion The comparison of both type of flaps is limited by the inherent design of the studies included. In sum, FF seem superior to the PMMF for several outcomes. SMIF and SCAIF compare favorably to FF for some specific indications achieving similar outcomes at a lower cost. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1916-0216 |