164
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Reduction of Donor Site Morbidity of Free Radial Forearm Flaps: What Level of Evidence Is Available?

      research-article
      , MD, DDS a , , MD b , , MD, PhD b , , MD a , , MD, DDS a , , MD, DDS a , , MD, DDS, PhD a , , MD, DDS, PhD a
      Eplasty
      Open Science Company, LLC

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: The radial forearm free flap (RFFF) is the most commonly used free flap in head and neck reconstructive surgery. However, despite excellent results with respect to the site of reconstruction, donor site morbidity cannot be neglected. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge and analyzes the level of evidence with regard to perioperative management of the reduction of RFFF donor site morbidity. Methods: The medical Internet source PubMed was screened for relevant articles. All relevant articles were tabulated according to the levels of scientific evidence, and the available methods for reduction of donor site morbidity are discussed. Results: Classification into levels of evidence reveals 3 publications (1.5%) with level I (randomized controlled trials), 29 (14.0%) with level II (experimental studies with no randomization, cohort studies, or outcome research), 3 (1.5%) with level III (systematic review of case-control studies or individual case-control studies), 121 (58.7%) with level IV (nonexperimental studies, such as cross-sectional trials, case series, case reports), and 15 (7.3%) with level V (narrative review or expert opinion without explicit critical appraisal). Thirty-five (17.0%) articles could not be classified, because they focused on a topic other than donor site morbidity of the RFFF. Conclusions: Although great interest has been expressed with regard to reducing the donor site morbidity of the workhorse flap in microvascular reconstruction procedures, most publications fail to provide the hard facts and solid evidence characteristic of high-quality research.

          Related collections

          Most cited references218

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Penile reconstruction: is the radial forearm flap really the standard technique?

          The ideal goals in penile reconstruction are well described, but the multitude of flaps used for phalloplasty only demonstrates that none of these techniques is considered ideal. Still, the radial forearm flap is the most frequently used flap and universally considered as the standard technique. In this article, the authors describe the largest series to date of 287 radial forearm phalloplasties performed by the same surgical team. Many different outcome parameters have been described separately in previously published articles, but the main purpose of this review is to critically evaluate to what degree this supposed standard technique has been able to meet the ideal goals in penile reconstruction. Outcome parameters such as number of procedures, complications, aesthetic outcome, tactile and erogenous sensation, voiding, donor-site morbidity, scrotoplasty, and sexual intercourse are assessed. In the absence of prospective randomized studies, it is not possible to prove whether the radial forearm flap truly is the standard technique in penile reconstruction. However, this large study demonstrates that the radial forearm phalloplasty is a very reliable technique for the creation, mostly in two stages, of a normal-appearing penis and scrotum, always allowing the patient to void while standing and in most cases also to experience sexual satisfaction. The relative disadvantages of this technique are the rather high number of initial fistulas, the residual scar on the forearm, and the potential long-term urologic complications. Despite the lack of actual data to support this statement, the authors feel strongly that a multidisciplinary approach with close cooperation between the reconstructive/plastic surgeon and the urologist is an absolute requisite for obtaining the best possible results.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Microsurgical free flap in head and neck reconstruction.

            Microsurgical free flaps are today considered state of the art in head and neck reconstruction after composite tumor resections. Free flaps provide superior functional and aesthetic restoration with less donor-site morbidity. This article details our approach to this challenging and complex procedure. Free tissue transfer can be viewed as consisting of 4 essential stages: (1) defect assessment, (2) preparation of recipient vessels, (3) flap selection and harvest, and (4) flap inset and microsurgical anastomoses. The essential details of each step are highlighted. Meticulous attention to each step is important because each plays a crucial role in the overall success of the procedure. Workhorse flaps in our practice are the anterolateral thigh, radial forearm, fibula, and jejunum flaps. Unique issues related to postoperative care and monitoring of head and neck free flaps are discussed. The management of complications, in particular those threatening flap survival, are reviewed in detail.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Analysis of outcome and complications in 400 cases of microvascular head and neck reconstruction.

              To determine the incidence and causes of perioperative complications in patients who undergo microvascular free flap procedures for reconstruction of the head and neck. Academic tertiary care medical center. A total of 400 consecutive microvascular free flap procedures were performed for reconstruction of the head and neck, with 95% of the defects arising after the treatment of malignancies. Flap donor sites included radial forearm (n = 183), fibula (n = 145), rectus abdominis (n = 38), subscapular system (n = 28), iliac crest (n = 5), and a jejunal flap. Patient-related characteristics (age; sex; diagnosis; comorbidity level; tumor stage; defect site; primary vs secondary reconstruction; and history of surgery, radiation therapy, or chemotherapy) and the incidence of perioperative complications were recorded prospectively over a 7-year period. The perioperative mortality was 1.3%. Overall, perioperative complications occurred in 36.1% of all cases. Free flaps proved to be extremely reliable, with a 0.8% incidence of free flap failure and a 3% incidence of partial flap necrosis. Perioperative medical complications occurred in 20.5% of cases, with pulmonary, cardiac, and infectious complications predominating. Multivariate statistical analysis showed significant relationships between the incidence of perioperative complications and preoperative comorbidity level as indicated by American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status (P =.02). The present study confirms that free flaps are extremely reliable in achieving successful reconstruction of the head and neck. The incidence of perioperative complications is related to preoperative comorbidity level.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eplasty
                Eplasty
                ePlasty
                Eplasty
                Open Science Company, LLC
                1937-5719
                2012
                3 February 2012
                : 12
                : e9
                Affiliations
                [1] aDepartment of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Technische Universität München, München, Germany
                [2] bDepartment of Plastic Surgery and Burn Center, BG University Hospital Bergmannsheil, Ruhr-University Bochum, Bochum, Germany
                Author notes

                The authors declare that they have no proprietary, financial, professional, or other personal interests of any nature or kind in any product or service that could be construed as influencing the position presented in the manuscript.

                Article
                9
                3273314
                22331991
                8a48db4c-11af-4e43-a410-4d665d88e6b1
                Copyright © 2012 The Author(s)

                This is an open-access article whereby the authors retain copyright of the work. The article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Categories
                Journal Article

                Surgery
                Surgery

                Comments

                Comment on this article