Summary:
Advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis is arguably among the most challenging cases for reconstructive head and neck surgeons. Several reconstructive methods for complex mandibular defects have been reported; however, for advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis, a safe option that minimizes the risk of renewed fistulation and infections is needed. For this purpose, we present a new technique using a fascia-sparing vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap as protection for a vascularized free fibula graft (FFG). This technique also optimizes recipient site healing and functionality while minimizing donor site morbidity. Our initial experiences from a 4 patient case series are included. Mean operative time was 551 minutes (SD: 81 minutes). All donor sites were closed primarily. Mean time to discharge was 13 days (SD: 7 days), and mean time to full mobilization was 2 days (SD: 1 days). This double free flap technique completely envelops the FFG and plate with nonirradiated muscle. It allows for the transfer of an FFG without a skin island, thus avoiding the need for split skin graft closure. This results in faster healing and minimizes the risk of fibula donor site morbidity. The skin island of the vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap has the added benefit of providing intraoral lining, which minimizes contractures and trismus. Although prospective long-term studies comparing this approach to other double flap procedures are needed, we argue that this technique is an optimal approach to safeguard the mandibular FFG reconstruction against the inherent risks of renewed complications in irradiated unhealthy tissue.
INTRODUCTION
Advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis (mORN) is arguably among the most challenging cases for reconstructive head and neck surgeons.1–5 Compared with other head and neck microvascular reconstructions, mORN is typically more expensive and prone to a higher risk of complications.1,2,4,6–9 Still, radical surgical management remains the only option for advanced mORN.1,8,10–15 There is general consensus that it is beneficial to transfer well-vascularized nonirradiated healthy tissue into the hypovascular, hypocellular, and hypoxic fibrotic wound.3,8,13,14,16–18
Several reconstructive methods for complex mandibular defects have been described, including single free flaps,6,12,13,19–29 free flaps and pedicled flaps,30,31 and double free flaps.1,32–37 We regularly use many of these methods as either single or double flap procedures; however, for advanced mORN, a safe option that minimizes the risk of renewed fistulation and infections is needed. We hypothesized that using a fascia-sparing vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (VRAM) flap as protection for a vascularized free fibula graft (FFG) and plate would benefit wound healing with minimal donor site morbidity. In this case series, we present the surgical technique and our first results for advanced mORN.
METHODS
We reviewed data on mandibular reconstructions from our prospectively collected microvascular surgery database. We identified 4 patients with mORN who underwent a double free flap reconstruction with a vascularized FFG and a fascia-sparing VRAM flap (Table 1). According to Danish law, the requirement for ethics committee approval is waived for observational studies based on quality registry data.
Table 1.
Patient Demographics and Ablative Surgical Procedure
Patient | Sex | Age, y | BMI | Prior Head and Neck Cancer | Prior RT | Prior Free Flap | Relevant Comorbidities | Presenting with | Ablative Surgical Procedure |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | M | 49 | 21 | ′13, ′14, ′15, ′16: Intraoral SCC | Yes | ′17: osteocutaneous free fibula graft to left mandibular | None | BilateralmORN, intraoral fibula exposure, abscess, fistula to the skin, pain | Angular to angular resection incl. fistula, abscess and fibula graft |
2 | M | 71 | 25 | ′12: Intraoral metastatic SCC, unknown primary tumor | Yes | None | None | mORN right, intra- and extraoral fistulas, mandibular fracture, pain, trismus | Right hemimandibulectomy incl. fistulas and mucosal lining and soft tissue |
3 | F | 76 | 22 | ′92: Carcinoma in submandibular gland ′07: Tongue cancer |
Yes | None | Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease | mORN right, pain, scar tissue, trismus, intraoral exposure of the mandible | Right hemimandibulectomy incl. mucosal lining and soft tissue |
4 | M | 75 | 19 | ′14: Tonsil cancer | Yes | None | Chronic renal insufficiency Left nephrectomy 2015 Atrial fibrillation—anticoagulant treatment with Apixaban Hypertension |
mORN right, mandibular fracture, intraoral exposure of the mandibular, weight loss of 6 kg 2 weeks up to surgery | Right hemimandibulectomy incl. mucosal lining and soft tissue |
BMI indicates body mass index; F, female; M, male; RT, radiation therapy; SCC, squamous cell carcinoma.
Technique Description
Simultaneous with ablative surgery, in a 2-team approach, an FFG flap and a VRAM flap are raised. The FFG is raised in a standard fashion with no muscle or skin allowing for primary closure of the donor site. The fascia-sparing VRAM is based on the deep inferior epigastric vessels and raised lateral to and below the umbilicus after confirming 1 or more sufficient medial or lateral skin perforators via Doppler-signal (Fig. 1). To minimize the fascial defect, the fascia is incised in close proximity to the skin perforators and with a total width of <1 cm, following which the rectus muscle is enucleated to its second cranial intersection and the pubic symphysis (Fig. 1). A skin island (circa 5 by 12–20 cm) is raised and trimmed. The fascia is closed in 2 layers with minimal tension and without any mesh: a running Monomax 1-0 loop suture is used followed by horizontal mattress Monoplus 2-0 sutures. Skin closure is done in a standard fashion. The FFG is inserted and fixated with a titanium plate. To minimize kinking and to allow for anastomoses to nonirradiated recipient vessels, the FFG pedicle is typically tunnulated subcutaneously to the contralateral facial artery and vein (Fig. 2). The VRAM flap’s pedicle is anastomosed to the ipsilateral superior thyroid artery and internal jugular vein (end to side) or facial vessels (Table 2). The skin island of the VRAM flap is used as intraoral lining, allowing the muscle to envelop the FFG and anterior neck (Fig. 2). An extended skin island VRAM flap is sometimes used to cover both intra- and extraoral defects, in which case, the junction uniting the intra- and extraoral part is deepithelialized.
Fig. 1.
A diagram illustrating the harvest of the fascia-sparing VRAM flap. The vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap is based on the deep inferior epigastric vessels (a) with 1 or more skin perforators (b). The fascia is incised in close proximity to the skin perforators and with a total width being <1 cm (c), following which the rectus muscle is enucleated to its second cranial intersection and to the pubic symphysis (d). The fascia is closed primarily without the use of a mesh. See text for more details.
Fig. 2.
Illustration of a double free flap design for mandibular reconstruction. The vascularized free fibula graft with plate in place with its pedicle tunnulated to the contralateral facial recipient vessels (a). The skin island of the VRAM flap is used as intraoral lining (b), allowing the muscle to completely envelop the fibula graft and anterior neck (c). An extended skin island flap is sometimes used to cover both intra- and extraoral defects (d), in which case the junction uniting the intra- and extraoral part is deepithelialized. This is especially useful when the irradiated skin tissue (e) is too fragile for it to reach the midline.
Table 2.
Surgical Characteristics, Outcomes, and Postoperative Follow-up
Patient | Total Operative Time, min | Ischemia Time FFG, min | Ischemia Time VRAM, min | FFG Anastomosis with | VRAM Anastomosis with | FFG Donor Site Closure | VRAM Donor Site Closure | Time from Surgery to Discharge, d | Time to Full Mobilization, d | Post-OP Complications | Time Since Surgery, mo |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | 635 | 163 | 32 | Right FA + FV | Right STA + EJV | Primary | Primary | 9 | 2 | None | 8 |
2 | 510 | 78 | DNA | Left FA + FV | Left STA + IJV | Primary | Primary | 8 | 1 | None | 5 |
3 | 600 | 104 | 51 | Left STA+ IJV | Left FA + FV | Primary | Primary | 23 | 4 | Fascia rupture day 10, reoperation Minor fibula exposure, conservative healing |
3 |
4 | 459 | 71 | 44 | Left FA + FV | Right STA + IJV | Primary | Primary | 10/69* | 1 | ICH day 10, suspected underlying malignancy, cause still unknown | 2½ |
*Discharged from the Plastic and Reconstructive Department day 10, subsequent stay at the ICU (3 d), neurological department (14 d), and a neurological rehabilitation center (52 d) at which time the patient was discharged to outpatient physiotherapy with the expectation of a full recovery.
DNA indicates data not available; EJV, external jugular vein; FA, facial artery; FV, facial vein; ICH, intracerebral hemorrhage; ICU, intensive care unit; IJV, internal jugular vein; OP, operation; STA, superior thyroid artery.
RESULTS
Surgical characteristics and outcomes are presented in Table 2. Mean operative time was 551 minutes (SD: 81 minutes). All donor sites were closed primarily. One reoperation on day 10 for an abdominal fascia rupture was needed; this defect was also closed primarily. Mean time to discharge was 13 days (SD: 7 days), and mean time to full mobilization was 2 days (SD: 1 days). Patients 1 and 2 had planned minor cosmetic revisions to the external skin islands of their VRAM flaps.
DISCUSSION
To our knowledge, this is the first description of using a fascia-sparing VRAM flap to envelop and protect a vascularized FFG in the management of advanced mORN. Enveloping the FFG with muscle protects against fistulation and infection. The combination allows for the transfer of an FFG without a skin island. This avoids the need for a split skin graft closure, resulting in faster healing and a minimal risk of fibula donor site morbidity.5,20,38 The VRAM flap also provides soft tissue coverage as in a variety of head and neck reconstructions,23,28,39–45 and has the added benefit of providing intraoral lining using a skin island to minimize contractures and trismus, and potentially also adding external skin islands, if needed. Flap trimming is often unnecessary, as mORN patients have minimal abdominal fat due to their poor nutritional state. Owing to its long pedicle and extensive vasculature with numerous skin perforators,43,46–48 it is considered safe and reliable, with a low complication rate.5,43,44,46,48 A fascia-sparing approach allows for primary closure of the donor site and therefore acceptable donor site morbidity with a low risk of herniation.32,44,46,48,49 One patient had a postoperative fascia rupture. Preoperatively, the patient was severely cachectic. At reoperation, the fascia was closed without the use of a mesh.
Combining a VRAM flap with an FFG has been described,32–34 but not with this optimized approach. A case series described a “sandwich” technique of an osteocutaneous fibula flap with an anterior lateral thigh flap.36 Although useful in many cases,1,33,35 adding muscle coverage further minimizes the inherent risks of working with irradiated tissue.
In this case series, operation time and length of hospital stay were similar to earlier reports for both single and double flap reconstructions.1,22,25,26,30,32,33,35,37,38 One patient had an intracerebral hemorrhage on postoperative day 10, which in-hospital neurologists have assessed as unrelated to the surgical procedure.
This study’s main limitations include its retrospective small case-series design and a short follow-up period. Optimally, a prospective study comprising different double flap approaches should be conducted to evaluate immediate recipient and donor site outcomes as well as long-term functionality and risk of recurrence.
CONCLUSIONS
This case series presents a new optimized technique using a fascia-sparing VRAM flap to envelop and protect a vascularized FFG for reconstruction of advanced mORN. Prospective studies are needed to compare this procedure to other single or double free flap procedures in the management of advanced mORN.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
We thank Ken Peter Kragsfeldt for his illustrations (Figures 1 and 2).
Footnotes
Published online 24 September 2020.
Disclosure: The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article.
REFERENCES
- 1.Rommel N, Kesting MR, Rohleder NH, et al. Surgical management of severe osteoradionecrosis of the mandibular bone by using double free flap reconstruction. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2018;46:148. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Park L, Lilic N, Addison B, et al. Cost analysis of osteoradionecrosis. J Laryngol Otol. 2017;131:303–308. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Zaghi S, Miller M, Blackwell K, et al. Analysis of surgical margins in cases of mandibular osteoradionecrosis that progress despite extensive mandible resection and free tissue transfer. Am J Otolaryngol. 2012;33:576–580. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Cannady SB, Dean N, Kroeker A, et al. Free flap reconstruction for osteoradionecrosis of the jaws–outcomes and predictive factors for success. Head Neck. 2011;33:424–428. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Kroll SS, Schusterman MA, Reece GP, et al. Choice of flap and incidence of free flap success. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1996;98:459–463. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Lyons AJ, Nixon I, Papadopoulou D, et al. Can we predict which patients are likely to develop severe complications following reconstruction for osteoradionecrosis? Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013;51:707–713. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Shan XF, Li RH, Lu XG, et al. Fibular free flap reconstruction for the management of advanced bilateral mandibular osteoradionecrosis. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26:e172–e175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Hirsch DL, Bell RB, Dierks EJ, et al. Analysis of microvascular free flaps for reconstruction of advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis: a retrospective cohort study. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2008;66:2545–2556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Nabil S, Samman N.Risk factors for osteoradionecrosis after head and neck radiation: a systematic review. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2012;113:54–69. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Alam DS, Nuara M, Christian J.Analysis of outcomes of vascularized flap reconstruction in patients with advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;141:196–201. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Al Deek NF, Wei FC.The osteosarcoradionecrosis as an unfavorable result following head and neck tumor ablation and microsurgical reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43:753–759. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Zaghi S, Danesh J, Hendizadeh L, et al. Changing indications for maxillomandibular reconstruction with osseous free flaps: a 17-year experience with 620 consecutive cases at UCLA and the impact of osteoradionecrosis. Laryngoscope. 2014;124:1329–1335. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Ang E, Black C, Irish J, et al. Reconstructive options in the treatment of osteoradionecrosis of the craniomaxillofacial skeleton. Br J Plast Surg. 2003;56:92–99. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Rice N, Polyzois I, Ekanayake K, et al. The management of osteoradionecrosis of the jaws – a review. Surgeon. 2015;13:101–109. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Curi MM, Oliveira dos Santos M, Feher O, et al. Management of extensive osteoradionecrosis of the mandible with radical resection and immediate microvascular reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2007;65:434–438. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Chapchay K, Weinberger J, Eliashar R, et al. Anterior skull base reconstruction following ablative surgery for osteoradionecrosis: case report and review of literature. Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2019;128:1134–1140. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bettoni J, Olivetto M, Duisit J, et al. The value of reconstructive surgery in the management of refractory jaw osteoradionecrosis: a single-center 10-year experience. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;48:1398–1404. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Bettoni J, Olivetto M, Duisit J, et al. Treatment of mandibular osteoradionecrosis by periosteal free flaps. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2019;57:550–556. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Coleman JJ, III, Wooden WA.Mandibular reconstruction with composite microvascular tissue transfer. Am J Surg. 1990;160:390–395. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Chen YB, Chen HC, Hahn LH.Major mandibular reconstruction with vascularized bone grafts: indications and selection of donor tissue. Microsurgery. 1994;15:227–237. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.O’Connell DA, Barber B, Klein MF, et al. Algorithm based patient care protocol to optimize patient care and inpatient stay in head and neck free flap patients. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2015;44:45. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Iseli TA, Yelverton JC, Iseli CE, et al. Functional outcomes following secondary free flap reconstruction of the head and neck. Laryngoscope. 2009;119:856–860. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 23.Chang DW, Oh HK, Robb GL, et al. Management of advanced mandibular osteoradionecrosis with free flap reconstruction. Head Neck. 2001;23:830–835. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 24.Shaha AR, Cordeiro PG, Hidalgo DA, et al. Resection and immediate microvascular reconstruction in the management of osteoradionecrosis of the mandible. Head Neck. 1997;19:406–411. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 25.Kesting MR, Hölzle F, Wales C, et al. Microsurgical reconstruction of the oral cavity with free flaps from the anterolateral thigh and the radial forearm: a comparison of perioperative data from 161 cases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:1988–1994. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 26.Baron S, Salvan D, Cloutier L, et al. Fibula free flap in the treatment of mandibular osteoradionecrosis. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2016;133:7–11. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 27.Wang L, Su YX, Liao GQ.Quality of life in osteoradionecrosis patients after mandible primary reconstruction with free fibula flap. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2009;108:162–168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 28.Yokoo S, Komori T, Furudoi S, et al. Indications for vascularized free rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap in oromandibular region in terms of efficiency of anterior rectus sheath. Microsurgery. 2003;23:96–102. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 29.Danielsson D, Gahm C, Haghdoost S, et al. Osteoradionecrosis, an increasing indication for microvascular head and neck reconstruction. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2020;49:1–6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 30.Chen YC, Valerio IL, Chien CY, et al. Pedicled mandible myo-osseous flaps combined with free skin flaps for reconstruction of complex lateral mandibular defects. Head Neck. 2012;34:384–392. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 31.Aarabi S, Draper L, Grayson B, et al. Bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw: successful treatment at 2-year follow-up. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:57e–59e. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 32.Wei FC, Demirkan F, Chen HC, et al. Double free flaps in reconstruction of extensive composite mandibular defects in head and neck cancer. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999;103:39–47. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 33.Wei FC, Yazar S, Lin CH, et al. Double free flaps in head and neck reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg. 2005;32:303, v–308, v. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 34.Makiguchi T, Yokoo S, Takayama Y, et al. Double free flap transfer using a vascularized free fibular flap and a rectus abdominalis musculocutaneous flap for an extensive oromandibular defect: prevention of sinking or drooping of the flap with an anterior rectus sheath. J Craniofac Surg. 2015;26:e622–e624. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 35.Hanasono MM, Weinstock YE, Yu P.Reconstruction of extensive head and neck defects with multiple simultaneous free flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:1739–1746. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 36.Weitz J, Kreutzer K, Bauer FJ, et al. Sandwich flaps as a feasible solution for the management of huge mandibular composite tissue defects. J Craniomaxillofac Surg. 2015;43:1769–1775. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 37.Guillemaud JP, Seikaly H, Cote DW, et al. Double free-flap reconstruction: indications, challenges, and prospective functional outcomes. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;135:406–410. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 38.Stalder MW, Mundinger GS, Bartow M, et al. Single versus simultaneous double free flaps for head and neck reconstruction: comparison of flap outcomes and donor-site morbidity. Ann Plast Surg. 2019;82:184–189. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 39.Silberstein E, Krieger Y, Rosenberg N, et al. Facial reconstruction of a mucormycosis survivor by free rectus abdominis muscle flap, tissue expansion, and ocular prosthesis. Ophthalmic Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;32:e131–e132. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 40.Andrade JP, Figueiredo S, Matias J, et al. Surgical resection of invasive adenoid cystic carcinoma of the lacrimal gland and wound closure using a vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous free flap. BMJ Case Rep. 2016;2016:bcr2015209473. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 41.Spiegel JH, Varvares MA.Prevention of postexenteration complications by obliteration of the orbital cavity. Skull Base. 2007;17:197–203. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 42.Küntscher MV, Mansouri S, Noack N, et al. Versatility of vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flaps. Microsurgery. 2006;26:363–369. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 43.Herman CK, Benacquista T, Brindzei N, et al. Single-stage maxillary and nasal floor reconstruction with the double-paddle rectus abdominis musculocutaneous free flap. J Reconstr Microsurg. 2007;23:131–135. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 44.Matros E, Cordeiro PG.Single-stage reconstruction of composite central neck defects with the double-island vertical rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap. Ann Plast Surg. 2011;66:164–167. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 45.Cordeiro PG, Santamaria E.A classification system and algorithm for reconstruction of maxillectomy and midfacial defects. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:2331–2346; discussion 2347. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 46.Taylor GI, Corlett RJ, Boyd JB.The versatile deep inferior epigastric (inferior rectus abdominis) flap. Br J Plast Surg. 1984;37:330–350. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 47.Boyd JB, Taylor GI, Corlett R.The vascular territories of the superior epigastric and the deep inferior epigastric systems. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1984;73:1–16. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 48.Patel NP, Matros E, Cordeiro PG.The use of the multi-island vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap in head and neck reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69:403–407. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 49.Johnstone MS.Vertical rectus abdominis myocutaneous versus alternative flaps for perineal repair after abdominoperineal excision of the rectum in the era of laparoscopic surgery. Ann Plast Surg. 2017;79:101–106. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]