Abstract
Background: Free-flap reconstruction via a retroauricular approach (RRA) after robot-assisted neck dissection (RAND) could have cosmetic benefits. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of free-flap reconstruction via a RRA and via a transcervical approach in head and neck cancer. Methods: For this matched case–control study, 50 patients with head and neck cancer requiring free-flap reconstruction were divided into two groups: those reconstructed via a RRA group and those reconstructed via a transcervical approach (RTA group). The total operation time for free-flap reconstruction, the flap survival rate, the length of the hospital stay, the complications, and the scar satisfaction scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The RRA group comprised 25 patients, and the RTA group had 25 patients. The mean operation time for reconstruction was 288 ± 77 min in the RRA group and 250 ± 98 min in the RTA group (p = 0.132). Flap failure occurred for two patients in the RRA group (8 %) and for one patient in the RTA group (4 %) (p = 1.000). The mean hospital stay was 21 ± 18 days in the RRA group and 23 ± 14 days in the RTA group (p = 0.669). The complications were comparable between the two groups. However, the overall scar satisfaction was significantly higher in the RRA group (p = 0.000). Conclusions: For patients with head and neck cancer, RRA has better cosmetic outcomes than RTA. The RRA approach could be used for select patients who undergo RAND and prefer to avoid a visible anterior neck scar.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 349-354 |
| Number of pages | 6 |
| Journal | Annals of Surgical Oncology |
| Volume | 22 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2015 Dec 1 |
Fingerprint
All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes
- Surgery
- Oncology
Cite this
}
A Study Comparing Free-Flap Reconstruction via the Retroauricular Approach and the Traditional Transcervical Approach for Head and Neck Cancer : A Matched Case–Control Study. / Kim, Won Shik; Park, Jae Hong; Byeon, Hyung Kwon; Chang, Jae Won; Ban, Myung Jin; Koh, Yoonwoo; Choi, Eun Chang.
In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol. 22, 01.12.2015, p. 349-354.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
TY - JOUR
T1 - A Study Comparing Free-Flap Reconstruction via the Retroauricular Approach and the Traditional Transcervical Approach for Head and Neck Cancer
T2 - A Matched Case–Control Study
AU - Kim, Won Shik
AU - Park, Jae Hong
AU - Byeon, Hyung Kwon
AU - Chang, Jae Won
AU - Ban, Myung Jin
AU - Koh, Yoonwoo
AU - Choi, Eun Chang
PY - 2015/12/1
Y1 - 2015/12/1
N2 - Background: Free-flap reconstruction via a retroauricular approach (RRA) after robot-assisted neck dissection (RAND) could have cosmetic benefits. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of free-flap reconstruction via a RRA and via a transcervical approach in head and neck cancer. Methods: For this matched case–control study, 50 patients with head and neck cancer requiring free-flap reconstruction were divided into two groups: those reconstructed via a RRA group and those reconstructed via a transcervical approach (RTA group). The total operation time for free-flap reconstruction, the flap survival rate, the length of the hospital stay, the complications, and the scar satisfaction scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The RRA group comprised 25 patients, and the RTA group had 25 patients. The mean operation time for reconstruction was 288 ± 77 min in the RRA group and 250 ± 98 min in the RTA group (p = 0.132). Flap failure occurred for two patients in the RRA group (8 %) and for one patient in the RTA group (4 %) (p = 1.000). The mean hospital stay was 21 ± 18 days in the RRA group and 23 ± 14 days in the RTA group (p = 0.669). The complications were comparable between the two groups. However, the overall scar satisfaction was significantly higher in the RRA group (p = 0.000). Conclusions: For patients with head and neck cancer, RRA has better cosmetic outcomes than RTA. The RRA approach could be used for select patients who undergo RAND and prefer to avoid a visible anterior neck scar.
AB - Background: Free-flap reconstruction via a retroauricular approach (RRA) after robot-assisted neck dissection (RAND) could have cosmetic benefits. This study aimed to compare the surgical outcomes of free-flap reconstruction via a RRA and via a transcervical approach in head and neck cancer. Methods: For this matched case–control study, 50 patients with head and neck cancer requiring free-flap reconstruction were divided into two groups: those reconstructed via a RRA group and those reconstructed via a transcervical approach (RTA group). The total operation time for free-flap reconstruction, the flap survival rate, the length of the hospital stay, the complications, and the scar satisfaction scores were compared between the two groups. Results: The RRA group comprised 25 patients, and the RTA group had 25 patients. The mean operation time for reconstruction was 288 ± 77 min in the RRA group and 250 ± 98 min in the RTA group (p = 0.132). Flap failure occurred for two patients in the RRA group (8 %) and for one patient in the RTA group (4 %) (p = 1.000). The mean hospital stay was 21 ± 18 days in the RRA group and 23 ± 14 days in the RTA group (p = 0.669). The complications were comparable between the two groups. However, the overall scar satisfaction was significantly higher in the RRA group (p = 0.000). Conclusions: For patients with head and neck cancer, RRA has better cosmetic outcomes than RTA. The RRA approach could be used for select patients who undergo RAND and prefer to avoid a visible anterior neck scar.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84952871016&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84952871016&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1245/s10434-015-4795-6
DO - 10.1245/s10434-015-4795-6
M3 - Article
VL - 22
SP - 349
EP - 354
JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology
JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology
SN - 1068-9265
ER -