Search

Objectives/hypothesis: Fibula flaps are routinely used for osseous reconstruction of head and neck defects. However, single-barrel fibula flaps may result in a height discrepancy between native mandible and grafted bone, limiting outcomes from both an aesthetic and dental standpoint. The double-barrel fibula flap aims to resolve this. We present our institution's outcomes comparing both flap designs., Study Design: Retrospective cohort study., Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of all patients undergoing free fibula flap mandibular reconstruction at our institution between October 2008 and October 2020. Patients were grouped based on whether they underwent single-barrel or double-barrel reconstruction. Postoperative outcomes data were collected and compared between groups. Differences in categorical and continuous variables were assessed using a Chi-square test or Student's t-test, respectively., Results: Out of 168 patients, 126 underwent single-barrel and 42 underwent double-barrel reconstruction. There was no significant difference in postoperative morbidity between approaches, including total complications (P = .37), flap-related complications (P = .62), takeback to the operating room (P = .75), flap salvage (P = .66), flap failure (P = .45), and mortality (P = .19). In addition, there was no significant difference in operative time (P = .86) or duration of hospital stay (P = .17). After adjusting for confounders, primary dental implantation was significantly higher in the double-barrel group (odds ratio, 3.02; 95% confidence interval, 1.2-7.6; P = .019)., Conclusion: Double-barrel fibula flap mandibular reconstruction can be performed safely without increased postoperative morbidity or duration of hospital stay relative to single-barrel reconstruction. Moreover, the double-barrel approach is associated with higher odds of primary dental implantation and may warrant further consideration as part of an expanded toolkit for achieving early dental rehabilitation., Level of Evidence: 3 Laryngoscope, 132:1576-1581, 2022., (© 2021 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)

Objectives: The medial sural artery perforator (MSAP) free flap is an uncommonly utilized soft tissue flap in head and neck reconstruction. It is a thin, pliable, fasciocutaneous flap that provides significant pedicle length. The donor site can be closed primarily, and its location is more aesthetically pleasing to patients. We aim to describe the MSAP flap and compare it to other commonly used free flaps in the head and neck., Study Design: Retrospective case series., Methods: A retrospective review of all MSAP cases performed at New York University Langone Health was performed from July 2016 to November 2017. We examined the patients' age, diagnosis, history of prior radiation therapy, and comorbidities, as well as flap-specific information and recipient site., Results: Twenty-one patients underwent a variety of different head and neck procedures with coverage using an MSAP flap. Recipient sites included tongue, cheek, soft and hard palate, cervical esophagus, and pharynx. Pedicle length ranged from 8 cm to 12 cm. The smallest surface area harvested was 24 cm 2 (6 cm × 4 cm), and the largest was 120 cm 2 (15 cm × 8 cm). The flaps ranged from 5 to 12 mm in thickness. Venous coupler size ranged from 2.0 to 3.5 mm. Primary closure of the donor site was achieved in 18 of 21 flaps. Twenty of 21 flaps were transferred successfully., Conclusion: The MSAP flap is a highly versatile and reliable option for a thin, pliable soft tissue flap with a donor site that may be preferable over the radial forearm free flap and anterolateral thigh flap in complex head and neck reconstruction., Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 129:1330-1336, 2019., (© 2018 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.)