...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of otolaryngology - head & neck surgery = >Free versus pedicled flaps for reconstruction of head and neck cancer defects: a systematic review
【24h】

Free versus pedicled flaps for reconstruction of head and neck cancer defects: a systematic review

机译:游离皮瓣与带蒂皮瓣修复头颈癌缺损:系统评价

获取原文
           

摘要

The present review focuses on comparative studies of reconstruction with free flaps (FF) versus pedicled flaps (PF) after oncologic resection. A systematic review was developed in compliance with PRISMA guidelines and performed using the Pubmed, Medline, EMBASE, Amed and Biosis databases. A total of 30 articles were included. FF are associated with a longer operative time, a higher cost and a higher incidence of postoperative revisions compared to PF. FF are associated with a longer stay at the intensive care unit than the supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) and with a more extended hospital stay compared to the submental island flap (SMIF). FF are associated with fewer infections and necrosis compared to the pectoralis major myocutaneous flap (PMMF). The comparison of both type of flaps is limited by the inherent design of the studies included. In sum, FF seem superior to the PMMF for several outcomes. SMIF and SCAIF compare favorably to FF for some specific indications achieving similar outcomes at a lower cost.
机译:本综述着重于肿瘤切除术后游离皮瓣(FF)与带蒂皮瓣(PF)重建的比较研究。根据PRISMA指南进行了系统的审查,并使用Pubmed,Medline,EMBASE,Amed和Biosis数据库进行了审查。总共包括30篇文章。与PF相比,FF与更长的手术时间,更高的成本以及术后翻修的发生率相关。与锁骨下动脉岛状皮瓣(SMIF)相比,FF与重症监护病房的住院时间更长,而锁骨上动脉岛状皮瓣(SCAIF)的住院时间更长。与胸大肌皮瓣(PMMF)相比,FF与更少的感染和坏死相关。所包括研究的固有设计限制了两种类型襟翼的比较。总而言之,FF在某些方面似乎优于PMMF。 SMIF和SCAIF在某些特定适应症上以较低的成本获得了相似的结果,而FF则优于FF。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号