» Articles » PMID: 27218025

Orofacial Soft Tissue Reconstruction with Locoregional Flaps in a Health Resource-Depleted Environment: Experiences from Nigeria

Overview
Journal Arch Plast Surg
Specialty General Surgery
Date 2016 May 25
PMID 27218025
Citations 3
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Reconstruction of orofacial soft tissue defects is often challenging due to functional and aesthetic demands. Despite advances in orofacial soft tissue defect reconstruction using free flaps, locoregional flaps still remain an important option, especially in health resource-depleted environments. This retrospective study highlights our experiences in oral and maxillofacial soft tissue reconstruction using locoregional flaps.

Methods: A twenty-three years retrospective analysis of all patients managed in our department was undertaken. Information was sourced from patients' case notes and operating theater records. Data was analyzed using SPSS ver. 16 (SPSS Inc.) and Microsoft Excel 2007 (Microsoft).

Results: A total of 77 patients underwent orofacial soft tissue defect reconstruction within the years reviewed. Males accounted for 55 (71.4%) cases and trauma was the main etiological factor in 45 (58.4%) of the patients treated. When sites of defect were considered, the lip, 27 (32.1%), was the most frequent site followed by the nose, 17 (20.2%). Forehead flap, 51 (59.3%), was the most commonly used flap. Complications noted were tumor recurrences at the recipient bed in 3 (3.9%) cases, tumor occurrence at the donor site in 1 (1.3%) case and postoperative infection in 11 (14.3%) cases.

Conclusions: Locoregional flaps still have an important role in the rehabilitation of patients with orofacial soft tissue defects. They remain a vital tool in the armamentarium of the reconstructive surgeon, especially in health resource-depleted environments where advanced reconstructive techniques may not be feasible.

Citing Articles

Retrospective cross-sectional study to evaluate outcome of loco-regional flaps in head and neck reconstruction in Sudanese patients.

Yassin A, Mohamed M Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2024; 86(6):3255-3260.

PMID: 38846890 PMC: 11152882. DOI: 10.1097/MS9.0000000000002091.


Temporoparietal Flap for Facial Reconstruction: Donor Site Morbidity.

Rahpeyma A, Khajehahmadi S World J Plast Surg. 2024; 13(1):87-91.

PMID: 38742035 PMC: 11088726. DOI: 10.61186/wjps.13.1.87.


Head and Neck Wound Reconstruction Using Biodegradable Temporizing Matrix Versus Collagen-Chondroitin Silicone Bilayer.

Wu S, Wells M, Ascha M, Duggal R, Gatherwright J, Chepla K Eplasty. 2022; 22:e31.

PMID: 36000010 PMC: 9361342.

References
1.
Cho J, Jang Y, Hur G, Koh J, Seo D, Lee J . One stage reconstruction of skull exposed by burn injury using a tissue expansion technique. Arch Plast Surg. 2012; 39(2):118-23. PMC: 3385319. DOI: 10.5999/aps.2012.39.2.118. View

2.
Chan R, Chan J . Deltopectoral flap in the era of microsurgery. Surg Res Pract. 2014; 2014:420892. PMC: 4208505. DOI: 10.1155/2014/420892. View

3.
Weizman N, Gil Z, Wasserzug O, Amir A, Gur E, Margalit N . Surgical ablation and free flap reconstruction in children with malignant head and neck tumors. Skull Base. 2012; 21(3):165-70. PMC: 3312108. DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1275250. View

4.
Hunt J, Buchmann L . The supraclavicular artery flap for lateral skull and scalp defects: effective and efficient alternative to free tissue transfer. J Neurol Surg Rep. 2014; 75(1):e5-e10. PMC: 4110155. DOI: 10.1055/s-0033-1358376. View

5.
Chim H, Salgado C, Seselgyte R, Wei F, Mardini S . Principles of head and neck reconstruction: an algorithm to guide flap selection. Semin Plast Surg. 2012; 24(2):148-54. PMC: 3324247. DOI: 10.1055/s-0030-1255332. View