nach oben

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

Erschienen in:

27.05.2019 | Head & Neck

Quality of life in patients after reconstruction with the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) versus the radial free forearm flap (RFFF)

verfasst von: Jennifer L. Spiegel, Yiannis Pilavakis, Bernhard G. Weiss, Martin Canis, Christian Welz

Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology | Ausgabe 8/2019

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Gold-standard for defect reconstruction in the head and neck region is the radial free forearm flap (RFFF). The supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) gained popularity due to its versatility. Our objective was to compare functional advantages between both modalities.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 24 consecutive cases with advanced-stage squamous cell cancer of the oral cavity and oropharynx after cancer defect reconstruction with two modalities (12 SCAIF; 12 RFFF) was conducted. Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer

(EORTC) questionnaires, Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30-questions (QLQ-C30) and Quality of Life Questionnaire-Core 30 Head and Neck 35-questions (QLQ-H&N35).

Results

Mean follow-up was 22.2 ± 9.5 months. Comparison of quality of life (QOL) showed significant differences only in speech and problems with the senses in favor of the SCAIF.

Conclusion

Patients report satisfactory QOL results after oncologic surgery and reconstruction with preliminary no significant differences in most aspects comparing the two modalities. Therefore, the SCAIF appears as a viable alternative to the gold standard, the RFFF.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Wilson MK, Collyar D, Chingos DT, Friedlander M, Ho TW, Karakasis K, Kaye S, Parmar MK, Sydes MR, Tannock IF, Oza AM (2015) Outcomes and endpoints in cancer trials: bridging the divide. Lancet Oncol 16(1):e43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70380-8 CrossRefPubMed

International Classification of Functioning DaHI (2017) Towards a common language for Functioning, Disability and Health. https://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/. Accessed 24 Apr 2018

Murphy BA, Ridner S, Wells N, Dietrich M (2007) Quality of life research in head and neck cancer: a review of the current literature. Crit Rev Oncol / Hematol 62(3):251–267CrossRef

Pierre CS, Dassonville O, Chamorey E, Poissonnet G, Ettaiche M, Santini J, Peyrade F, Benezery K, Sudaka A, Bozec A (2014) Long-term quality of life and its predictive factors after oncologic surgery and microvascular reconstruction in patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 271(4):801–807. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-013-2592-z CrossRefPubMed

Hurvitz KA, Kobayashi M, Evans GR (2006) Current options in head and neck reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 118(5):122e–133eCrossRefPubMed

Giordano L, Santo DD, Occhini A, Galli A, Bertino G, Benazzo M, Bussi M (2016) Supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF): a rising opportunity for head and neck reconstruction. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol 273(12):1–10CrossRef

Canis M, Weiss BG, Ihler F, Hummers-Pradier E, Matthias C, Wolff HA (2016) Quality of life in patients after resection of pT3 lateral tongue carcinoma: Microvascular reconstruction versus primary closure. Head Neck 38(1):89–94. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23862 CrossRefPubMed

Welz C, Canis M, Schwenk-Zieger S, Spiegel JL, Weiss BG, Pilavakis Y (2017) Oral cancer reconstruction using the supraclavicular artery island flap: comparison to free radial forearm flap. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 75(10):2261–2269CrossRefPubMed

Spiegel JL, Pilavakis Y, Canis M, Welz C (2018) Shoulder morbidity in patients after head and neck reconstruction with the pedicled supraclavicular island flap. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 6(4):e1711. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000001711 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Bozec A, Demez P, Gal J, Chamorey E, Louis MY, Blanchard D, De-Raucourt D, Merol JC, Brenet E, Dassonville O, Poissonnet G, Santini J, Peyrade F, Benezery K, Lesnik M, Berta E, Ransy P, Babin E (2018) Long-term quality of life and psycho-social outcomes after oropharyngeal cancer surgery and radial forearm free-flap reconstruction: a GETTEC prospective multicentric study. Surg Oncol 27(1):23–30CrossRefPubMed

11.

Hsing CY, Wong YK, Wang CP, Wang CC, Jiang RS, Chen FJ, Liu SA (2014) Comparison between free flap and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cavity cancer patients—a quality of life analysis. Oral Oncol 47(6):522–527CrossRef

12.

Al-Hayder S, Elberg JJ, Charabi B (2017) Clinical outcome and health-related quality-of-life following microsurgical reconstruction in patients with oral and oropharyngeal cancer. Acta Otolaryngol 137(5):541–545. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016489.2016.1249945 CrossRefPubMed

13.

Li P, Zhang X, Luo RH, Zhao M, Liu ST, Du W, Qi JX (2015) Long-term quality of life in survivors of head and neck cancer who have had defects reconstructed with radial forearm free flaps. J Craniofac Surg 26(2):e75–78. https://doi.org/10.1097/SCS.0000000000001280 CrossRefPubMed

14.

Sobin LH, Compton CC (2010) TNM seventh edition: what's new, what's changed: communication from the International Union Against Cancer and the American Joint Committee on Cancer. Cancer 116(22):5336–5339. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.25537 CrossRefPubMed

15.

Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, Bullinger M, Cull A, Duez NJ, Filiberti A, Flechtner H, Fleishman SB, de-Haes JC, (1993) The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: A quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 85(5):365–376CrossRef

16.

Fayers P, Aaronson NK, Bjordal K, Groenvold M, Curran D, Bottomley A (2001) EORTC QLQ-C30 Scoring Manual, 3rd edn. European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Brussels

17.

Jones AS, Bin-Hanafi Z, Nadapalan V, Roland NJ, Kinsella A, Helliwell TR (1996) Do positive resection margins after ablative surgery for head and neck cancer adversely affect prognosis? A study of 352 patients with recurrent carcinoma following radiotherapy treated by salvage surgery. Br J Cancer 74(1):128–132CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

18.

Su WF, Hsia YJ, Chang YC, Chen SG, Sheng H (2003) Functional comparison after reconstruction with a radial forearm free flap or a pectoralis major flap for cancer of the tongue. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 128(3):412–418. https://doi.org/10.1067/mhn.2003.38 CrossRefPubMed

19.

Xiao Y, Zhu J, Cai X, Wang J, Liu FW (2013) Comparison between anterolateral thigh perforator free flaps and pectoralis major pedicled flap for reconstruction in oral cancer patients–a quality of life analysis. Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal 18(6):e856–e861CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Li W, Xu Z, Liu F, Huang S, Dai W, Sun C (2013) Vascularized free forearm flap versus free anterolateral thigh perforator flaps for reconstruction in patients with head and neck cancer: assessment of quality of life. Head Neck 35(12):1808–18013. https://doi.org/10.1002/hed.23254 CrossRefPubMed

21.

Tarsitano A, Vietti MV, Cipriani R, Marchetti C (2013) Functional results of microvascular reconstruction after hemiglossectomy: free anterolateral thigh flap versus free forearm flap. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 33(6):374–379PubMedPubMedCentral

22.

Yuan Y, Zhang P, He W, Li W (2016) Comparison of Oral Function: Free Anterolateral Thigh Perforator Flaps Versus Vascularized Free Forearm Flap for Reconstruction in Patients Undergoing Glossectomy. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 74(7):1500.e1501–1506. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joms.2016.03.039 CrossRef

23.

Quinten C, Coens C, Ghislain I, Zikos E, Sprangers M, Ringash J, Martinelli F, Ediebah D, Maringwa J, Reeve BB, Greimel E, King MT, Bjordal K, Flechtner HH, Schmucker-Von-Koch J, Taphoorn MJ, Weis J, Wildiers H, Velikova G, Bottomley A, PROBE, EORTC-Clinical-Groups (2015) The effects of age on health-related quality of life in cancer populations: A pooled analysis of randomized controlled trials using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 involving 6024 cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 51(18):2808–2819CrossRefPubMed

24.

Rettig E, D'Souza C, Koch W, Eisele D, Fakhry C (2016) Health-related quality of life before and after head and neck squamous cell carcinoma: Analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results-Medicare Health Outcomes Survey linkage. Cancer 122(12):1861–1870CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

25.

Tschudi D, Stoeckli S, Schmid S (2003) Quality of life after different treatment modalities for carcinoma of the oropharynx. Laryngoscope 113(11):1949–1954CrossRefPubMed

26.

Bian X, Xu ZG, Lu CM, Tang PZ, Luo J (2005) Cancer and surgical treatment impact the quality of life in patients with head and neck cancer. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi 40(8):606–610PubMed

27.

Friedlander P, Caruana S, Singh B, Shaha A, Kraus D, Harrison L, McKiernan J, Solan J, Polyak T, Shah JP (2002) Functional status after primary surgical therapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the base of the tongue. Head Neck 24(2):111–114CrossRefPubMed

28.

Giordano L, Bondi S, Toma S, Biafora M (2014) Versatility of the supraclavicular pedicle flap in head and neck reconstruction. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital 34(6):394–398PubMedPubMedCentral

29.

Granzow JW, Suliman A, Roostaeian J, Perry A, Boyd JB (2013) The supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) for head and neck reconstruction: surgical technique and refinements. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148(6):933–940CrossRefPubMed

30.

Granzow JW, Suliman A, Roostaeian J, Perry A, Boyd JB (2013) Supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) vs free fasciocutaneous flaps for head and neck reconstruction. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 148(6):941–948CrossRefPubMed

31.

Bruchhage KL, Leichtle A, Wollenberg B (2017) Rekonstruktion mit dem supraklavikulären Insellappen. HNO 65(1):53–57CrossRefPubMed

Titel: Quality of life in patients after reconstruction with the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) versus the radial free forearm flap (RFFF)
verfasst von: Jennifer L. Spiegel
Yiannis Pilavakis
Bernhard G. Weiss
Martin Canis
Christian Welz
Publikationsdatum: 27.05.2019
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology / Ausgabe 8/2019
Print ISSN: 0937-4477
Elektronische ISSN: 1434-4726
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-019-05478-6

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

16.04.2024 | HNO-Chirurgie | Nachrichten

Update HNO

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert – ganz bequem per eMail.

Newsletter bestellen

Springer Medizin

Quality of life in patients after reconstruction with the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) versus the radial free forearm flap (RFFF)

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

HNO-Op. auch mit über 90?

Intrakapsuläre Tonsillektomie gewinnt an Boden

Bilateraler Hörsturz hat eine schlechte Prognose

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Update HNO

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 8/2019

A Chair-based Abbreviated Repositioning Maneuver (ChARM) for fast treatment of posterior BPPV

Is endoscopic inspection necessary to detect residual disease in acoustic neuroma surgery?

Comparative study of nasal septal retainer and nasal packing in patients undergoing septoplasty

Posteroinferior septal defect due to vomeral malformation

Clinical application of supraclavicular flap for head and neck reconstruction

Multiple airborne allergen-induced eosinophilic chronic rhinosinusitis murine model

Neu im Fachgebiet HNO

HNO-Op. auch mit über 90?

Intrakapsuläre Tonsillektomie gewinnt an Boden

Bilateraler Hörsturz hat eine schlechte Prognose

„Nur wer sich gut aufgehoben fühlt, kann auch für Patientensicherheit sorgen“

Update HNO