Vascularized osseous flaps for head and neck reconstruction: Comparative analysis focused on complications and salvage options.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of fibular (FFF group) and scapular (SFF group) osseous free flaps for reconstructing head and neck defects for primary surgery and salvage options.

METHODS

We analyzed 156 cases of osseous free flaps in 138 patients from a retrospective review of a single institutional database between January 1996 and January 2020 (FFF, 114 cases in 99 patients; SFF, 42 cases in 39 patients). Clinical profiles such as age, sex, primary tumor site, and defect type were investigated in the two groups. In addition, the incidences and types of perioperative complications, flap compromise, and salvage management were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

FFF was used mostly for oromandibular defects, whereas SFF was preferred for maxillary defect reconstruction. The length of hospital stay was longer in the FFF group than in the SFF group. The flap compromise rate was not significantly different between the two groups; however, donor-site complications were not observed in the SFF group as compared to 7.9% in the FFF group. A regional or free (musculo) cutaneous flap was used as a salvage procedure in partial flap compromise. Contralateral SFF was available to replace a completely compromised SFF, whereas it was not feasible in a completely compromised FFF. Cox proportional hazards analysis showed no significant prognostic factors for flap-related complications.

CONCLUSION

The two osseous free flaps showed differences in defect type, flap donor complications, and options for compromised flap salvage. These findings must be considered carefully in the preoperative planning stage to guarantee early recovery and timely administration of postoperative adjuvant treatment if necessary.