Centre Oscar Lambret, BP 307, 59020 Lille Cedex, France.
Oral Oncol. 2009 Dec;45(12):1028-31. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2009.05.639. Epub 2009 Sep 30.
Reconstruction after extensive resection of the tongue remains a surgical challenge. Free soft-tissue transfer is now favored for head and neck reconstruction following cancer resection. However, the choice of either free tissue transfer (FTT) or of the pedicled Pectoralis Major Musculocutaneous Flap (PMMF), the workhorse in head and neck reconstruction, remains controversial. The purpose of this study is to assess the post-operative outcomes after radical ablative surgery and reconstruction for patients with a tongue cancer. We conducted a retrospective comparison of two different reconstruction techniques. From January 2000 to December 2006, 70 consecutive patients with tongue cancer had been treated with curative intent by extensive ablative surgery and soft-tissue reconstruction. Sixty percent of tumors were T3 or T4. We compared the post-operative outcomes of both populations: 25 patients underwent FTT and 45 underwent pedicled PMMF. Fifty-seven men and 13 women with a mean age of 55 years constitute the study population. The two groups were comparable in terms of age, gender, and addiction. The choice of flap technique was independent of the ASA scale (p=1.00), the weight of comorbidities (p=0.13), previous radiation therapy (p=0.09), the T-stage (p=0.44) or N-stage (p=0.21). Apart from the rate of flap necrosis, which occurred significantly more often in the PMMF group (p=0.02), post-operative complication rates did not differ between the two groups. The success rate of FTT was 96% (24/25). The duration of the post-operative stay was longer after use of the pedicled flap technique, but the difference did not reach statistical significance (mean duration in days: 23.2 vs. 18.1; p=0.10). Both groups did not differ as regards duration of use of a feeding tube (p=0.84) or of tracheostomy (p=0.54). Local disease-free survival was also similar (p=0.65). The two groups were similar in terms of patients' characteristics. The reliability of free flaps was higher than that of PMMF. The assessment of our practice in the case of extensive tongue defect suggests that reconstruction with free soft-tissue transfer, whenever feasible, should be the first-choice treatment option.
广泛切除舌后重建仍然是一项具有挑战性的手术。游离软组织移植目前常用于头颈部癌症切除后的重建。然而,对于游离组织移植(FTT)或带蒂胸大肌肌皮瓣(PMMF)的选择,后者是头颈部重建的主力,仍然存在争议。本研究旨在评估舌癌根治性切除及重建术后的临床疗效。我们对两种不同的重建技术进行了回顾性比较。从 2000 年 1 月至 2006 年 12 月,70 例舌癌患者接受了广泛切除和软组织重建的根治性治疗。60%的肿瘤为 T3 或 T4 期。我们比较了两组患者的术后结果:25 例患者接受 FTT,45 例患者接受带蒂 PMMF。研究人群包括 57 名男性和 13 名女性,平均年龄为 55 岁。两组患者在年龄、性别和吸烟方面具有可比性。皮瓣技术的选择与美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)评分无关(p=1.00)、与合并症的权重无关(p=0.13)、与既往放疗无关(p=0.09)、与 T 分期无关(p=0.44)或与 N 分期无关(p=0.21)。除带蒂皮瓣组的皮瓣坏死发生率明显更高(p=0.02)外,两组术后并发症发生率无差异。FTT 的成功率为 96%(24/25)。使用带蒂皮瓣技术后,术后住院时间较长,但差异无统计学意义(平均住院天数:23.2 天 vs. 18.1 天;p=0.10)。两组患者在使用饲管(p=0.84)或气管造口术(p=0.54)的时间上无差异。局部无病生存率也相似(p=0.65)。两组患者的特征相似。游离皮瓣的可靠性高于 PMMF。对广泛舌缺损病例的治疗评估表明,只要可行,游离软组织移植重建应作为首选治疗方案。