Cancers · 2025
Reconstruction of the Oral Cavity Using Facial Vessel-Based Flaps-A Narrative Review.
СтатьяОбзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lis Emilia, Michalik Weronika, Bargiel Jakub, Gąsiorowski Krzysztof, Marecik Tomasz, Szczurowski Paweł, Wyszyńska-Pawelec Grażyna, Dubrowski Andrzej, Gontarz Michał
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of oral cavity defects following oncologic surgery presents both functional and esthetic challenges. While microvascular free flaps remain the gold standard for large defects, local flaps based on facial vessels offer effective solutions for small-to-medium-sized reconstructions. This narrative review evaluates the clinical utility of three commonly used facial vessel-based flaps: facial artery musculomucosal, submental, and nasolabial flaps.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, targeting studies from 1981 to 2025 that described the anatomical basis, harvesting techniques, modifications, indications, advantages, disadvantages, complications, limitations, and outcomes of these flaps. A total of 73 full-text articles were included based on predefined inclusion criteria.
RESULTS: The FAMM flap provides versatile intraoral coverage with low donor site morbidity. The submental flap is effective in select patients, particularly those unfit for microvascular surgery, though its oncologic safety in neck-positive cases is limited. The nasolabial flap offers good esthetic and functional results with minimal external scarring. Each flap presents unique attributes regarding reach, vascularity, and complication profiles.
CONCLUSIONS: Facial vessel-based flaps are viable and effective options for oral cavity reconstruction in appropriate clinical scenarios. Thorough knowledge of flap anatomy, indications, and oncologic considerations is essential for optimal outcomes.
METHODS: A literature search was conducted using PubMed, targeting studies from 1981 to 2025 that described the anatomical basis, harvesting techniques, modifications, indications, advantages, disadvantages, complications, limitations, and outcomes of these flaps. A total of 73 full-text articles were included based on predefined inclusion criteria.
RESULTS: The FAMM flap provides versatile intraoral coverage with low donor site morbidity. The submental flap is effective in select patients, particularly those unfit for microvascular surgery, though its oncologic safety in neck-positive cases is limited. The nasolabial flap offers good esthetic and functional results with minimal external scarring. Each flap presents unique attributes regarding reach, vascularity, and complication profiles.
CONCLUSIONS: Facial vessel-based flaps are viable and effective options for oral cavity reconstruction in appropriate clinical scenarios. Thorough knowledge of flap anatomy, indications, and oncologic considerations is essential for optimal outcomes.