Dataset Information

Survival of vascularized osseous flaps in mandibular reconstruction: A network meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

An evidence regarding which bony flap for reconstruction of mandibular defects following tumour resection is associated with the highest survival rate is still lacking. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to guide surgeons selecting which vascularized osseous flap is associated with the highest survival rate for mandibular reconstruction.

Methods

From inception to March 2021, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane library were searched to identify the eligible studies. The outcome variable was the flap survival rate. The Bayesian NMA accompanied by a random effect model and 95% credible intervals (CrI) was calculated.

Results

Twenty-two studies with a total of 1513 patients, comparing four osseous flaps namely fibula free flap (FFF), deep circumferential iliac artery flap (DCIA), scapula flap, and osteocutaneous radial forearm flap (ORFF) were included. The respective survival rates of FFF, DCIA, Scapula, and ORFF were 94.50%, 93.12%, 97%, and 95.95%. The NMA failed to show a statistically significant difference between all comparators (FFF versus DCIA (Odd ratio, 1.8; CrI, 0.58,5.0); FFF versus ORFF (Odd ratio, 0.57; CrI, 0.077; 2.9); FFF versus scapula flap (Odd ratio, 0.25; CrI, 0.026; 1.5); DCIA versus ORFF (Odd ratio, 0.32; CrI, 0.037; 2.1); DCIA versus scapula flap (Odd ratio, 0.14; CrI, 0.015; 1.1) and ORFF versus scapula flap (Odd ratio, 2.3; CrI, 0.16; 34)).

Conclusion

Within the limitations of the current NMA, FFF, DCIA, Scapula, and ORFF showed a comparable survival rate for mandibular reconstruction. Although the scapula flap reported the highest survival rate compared to other osseous flaps for mandibular reconstruction; however, the decision making when choosing an osseous flap should be based on many factors rather than simply flap survival rate.

SUBMITTER: Mashrah MA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8535428 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Survival of vascularized osseous flaps in mandibular reconstruction: A network meta-analysis.

Mashrah Mubarak Ahmed MA Aldhohrah Taghrid T Abdelrehem Ahmed A Sakran Karim Ahmed KA Ahmad Hyat H Mahran Hamada H Abu-Lohom Faisal F Su Hanfu H Fang Ying Y Wang Liping L

PloS one 20211022 10

<h4>Objective</h4>An evidence regarding which bony flap for reconstruction of mandibular defects following tumour resection is associated with the highest survival rate is still lacking. This network meta-analysis (NMA) aimed to guide surgeons selecting which vascularized osseous flap is associated with the highest survival rate for mandibular reconstruction.<h4>Methods</h4>From inception to March 2021, PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane library were searched to identify the eligible studies. ...[more]

PMID: 34679077

Similar Datasets

Project description:Introduction There is currently no consensus as to the comparative complication profiles of mini-plate (MP) and reconstruction bar (RB) osseous fixation in fibula flap mandibular reconstruction. The aim of this study is to compare complication rates associated with the use of MP versus RB fixation for vascularized fibula free flap (FFF) reconstruction of oncologic mandibular defects in an effort to better guide hardware utilization and pre-operative virtual surgical planning methods. Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were queried to identify studies related to FFF-based mandibular reconstruction with either MP or RB fixation. Primary endpoints of interest were plate complications, wound infection, mal- or non-union, and total flap loss. Complication rates were calculated as weighted proportions and compared via Fisher's exact testing. Results Sixteen studies met inclusion criteria, which examined 1,513 patients. Only three studies directly compared MP fixation with RB fixation. MP fixation was used in 828 (54.7%) cases and RB fixation in 685 (45.3%) cases. MP fixation demonstrated greater rates of plate-related complications (32.5% versus 18.8%, p < 0.01, respectively), fistula formation (15.8% versus 4.7%, p = 0.04), total flap loss (9.4% versus 4.7%, p = 0.02), partial flap loss (20.6% versus 6.1%, p < 0.01), and re-operation for vascular compromise (13.3% versus 4.0%, p < 0.01). Rates of infection, mal-union/non-union, and wound dehiscence were similar across both groups. Conclusion Our results suggest that MP use may be associated with higher rates of plate-related complications. Though limited by outcome reporting heterogeneity, this review can serve as a template for future investigations evaluating the safety profiles of MP and RB fixation in head and neck surgery.

Project description:Background Choosing the components of free flap (fasciocutaneous or muscle) is one of the crucial but controversial decisions in heel reconstruction. This meta-analysis aims to provide an up-to-date comparison of fasciocutaneous flaps (FCFs) and muscle flaps (MFs) for heel reconstruction and to ascertain if one flap has an advantage over the other. Methods Following the Preferred Reporting Item for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, a systematic literature review was performed identifying studies on heel reconstruction with FCF and MF. Primary outcomes were survival, time of ambulation, sensation, ulceration, gait, need for specialized footwear, revision procedures, and shear. Meta-analyses and Trial Sequential Analysis (TSA) were performed to estimate the pooled risk ratios (RRs) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with fixed effects and random effects models, respectively. Results Of 757 publications identified, 20 were reviewed including 255 patients with 263 free flaps. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference between MF and FCF in terms of survival (RR, 1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83, 1.21), gait abnormality (RR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.19, 1.59), ulcerations (RR, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.27, 1.54), footwear modification (RR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.26, 1.09), and revision procedures (RR, 1.67; 95% CI, 0.84, 3.32). FCF had superior perception of deep pressure (RR, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.32, 3.00), light touch, and pain (RR, 5.17; 95% CI, 2.02, 13.22) compared with MF. Time to full weight-bearing (SMD, -3.03; 95% CI, -4.25, -1.80) was longer for MF compared with FCF. TSA showed inconclusive results for comparison of the survival of flaps, gait assessment, and rates of ulceration. Conclusion Patients reconstructed with FCF had superior sensory recovery and early weight bearing on their reconstructed heels, hence faster return to daily activities compared with MFs. In terms of other outcomes such as footwear modification and revision procedure, both flaps had no statistically significant difference. The results were inconclusive regarding the survival of flaps, gait assessment, and rates of ulceration. Future studies are required to investigate the role of shear on the stability of the reconstructed heels.

Dataset Information

Survival of vascularized osseous flaps in mandibular reconstruction: A network meta-analysis.

Objective

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Survival of vascularized osseous flaps in mandibular reconstruction: A network meta-analysis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets