Chimeric vs composite flaps for mandible reconstruction. Issue 6 (18th February 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Silva, Amanda K.; Humphries, Laura S.; Maldonado, Andrés A.; Gottlieb, Lawrence J.
• Is Part Of: Head & neck. Volume 41:Issue 6(2019)
• Page Start: 1597
• Page End: 1604
• Publication Date: 2019-02-18
• Subjects: head and neck reconstruction -- intrinsic chimeric flap -- mandible reconstruction; Head -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Neck -- Diseases -- Periodicals; Head -- Periodicals; Neck -- Periodicals; Face -- Periodicals; 617.51059
• DOI: 10.1002/hed.25606
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1043-3074

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Composite mandibular reconstruction requires multiple tissue components inset in different planes. Intrinsic chimeric flap design provides this, and may be best suited for these reconstructions. Methods: A retrospective review of mandible reconstructions with composite, intrinsic chimeric, or 2 free flaps was performed. Patient and flap characteristics and complications were analyzed. Results: Seventy‐five patients were reviewed. Defects reconstructed with intrinsic chimeric flaps had significantly more soft tissue needs than composite reconstructions. However, intrinsic chimeric bony defects were less complex. Despite significantly longer operative times for intrinsic chimeric flaps, there were no differences in complications or hospital stays. Intrinsic chimeric reconstruction resulted in significantly lower complication rates requiring an additional flap. This benefit was pronounced in through‐and‐through defects. Conclusion: Intrinsic chimeric flaps are a better option than composite flaps for reconstruction of mandibular defects with large soft tissue needs with no increased complication risk despite longer operative time.