Head & neck · 2020
Shape-modified radial forearm free tissue transfer in oral cavity reconstruction: Technique and a prospective comparison with the conventional technique.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Chavre Sachin, Thankappan Krishnakumar, Mathew Jimmy, Sharma Mohit, Iyer Subramania
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Donor site morbidity is a significant drawback of the radial forearm flap. The purpose of this study is to describe a new shape-modified technique. The donor site morbidity was compared to that of the conventional technique, in terms of the esthetic, functional outcomes, and quality of life (QOL).
METHODS: This is a prospective study of 30 patients with oral cancer who underwent reconstruction using radial forearm flaps, in two groups.
RESULTS: Regarding the donor site characteristics, the differences in the time for healing (P = .006), the scar score (P < .0001), and the QOL score (P < .0001) were significant. The number of patients with sensory deficit was 11 in the conventional group and 3 in the shape-modified group (P = .009).
CONCLUSIONS: The functional and esthetic outcomes of the donor site were better for the shape-modified technique. It is best suited for small defects. Compromise of the pedicle length is a limitation.
METHODS: This is a prospective study of 30 patients with oral cancer who underwent reconstruction using radial forearm flaps, in two groups.
RESULTS: Regarding the donor site characteristics, the differences in the time for healing (P = .006), the scar score (P < .0001), and the QOL score (P < .0001) were significant. The number of patients with sensory deficit was 11 in the conventional group and 3 in the shape-modified group (P = .009).
CONCLUSIONS: The functional and esthetic outcomes of the donor site were better for the shape-modified technique. It is best suited for small defects. Compromise of the pedicle length is a limitation.