MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: Reconstruction of soft-tissue defects of the head and neck: radial forearm flap or anterolateral thigh flap?
Author: Liu WW, Li H, Guo ZM, Zhang Q, Yang AK, Liu XK, Song M.
Journal: Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol; 2011 Dec; 268(12):1809-12. PubMed ID: 21387188.
Abstract:
This study compared the reliability, practicability and impact to donor site functionality of radial forearm (RF) and anterolateral thigh (ALT) flaps used for the reconstruction of head and neck soft-tissue defects. The clinical data of patients who underwent reconstruction using RF flaps (n = 53) and ALT flaps (n = 21) after tumour ablation were reviewed. Pedicle length, skin area harvested and flap survival rate were compared between the two flap types. A questionnaire was used to compare the patients' perceptions of donor site functionality. Pedicle length did not significantly differ between RF and ALT flaps (7.5 vs. 9 cm, p = 0.733). A significantly larger mean area of skin was harvested in the ALT group than in the RF group (65 vs. 38 cm(2), p = 0.001). Flap survival rates did not differ between the two groups (p = 0.554). Patients in the ALT group were more satisfied with the appearance of the donor sites than were those in the RF group (p = 0.029). Significantly more patients in the RF group complained of donor site numbness than in the ALT group (p = 0.014). No ALT group patients complained of movement impairment or weakness at the donor sites, but 10% of RF group patients experienced impairment (p = 0.014) and 35% felt weakness (p = 0.001). The ALT and RF flaps showed similar practicability and reliability for the reconstruction of soft-tissue defects, but ALT flaps had fewer impacts to donor site functionality than RF flaps.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]