1 Department of Otolaryngology, SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York, USA.
2 Department of Otolaryngology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas, USA.
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2019 Feb;160(2):215-222. doi: 10.1177/0194599818803603. Epub 2018 Oct 9.
The aim of this systematic review is to compare the surgical outcomes of supraclavicular artery island flap (SCAIF) and free tissue transfer (FTT) in head and neck reconstruction.
PubMed, Web of Science, and EMBASE databases.
Independent screening and data extraction were performed by 2 authors. Only studies that directly compared SCAIF and FTT were included. Data were pooled with random-effects meta-analysis to determine the standardized mean differences (SMDs), risk differences, and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistics. The Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies tool was used to evaluate extent of bias in studies.
The initial query yielded 661 results, of which 4 comparative studies remained for final analysis. The pooled sample sizes for the SCAIF and FTT cohorts were 100 and 84, respectively. SCAIF was associated with reduction of operative time by a large effect size (SMD, 1.65; 95% confidence interval, 0.78-2.52). The harvested flap areas and perioperative complications, including rates of total flap loss, partial flap necrosis, and recipient/donor site dehiscences, were comparable between the 2 procedures with low to high heterogeneity among studies.
SCAIF requires less operative time and has comparable short-term perioperative results to FTT. The findings of this study support the viability of SCAIF as an alternative to FTT and provide evidence for its inclusion in the reconstructive armamentarium of major head and neck ablation and trauma.
本系统评价旨在比较锁骨上动脉岛状皮瓣(SCAIF)和游离组织移植(FTT)在头颈部重建中的手术效果。
PubMed、Web of Science 和 EMBASE 数据库。
由 2 名作者独立进行筛选和数据提取。仅纳入直接比较 SCAIF 和 FTT 的研究。采用随机效应荟萃分析对数据进行汇总,以确定标准化均数差(SMD)、风险差和 95%置信区间(CI)。采用 I ²统计量评估异质性。采用非随机研究方法学指数工具评估研究中的偏倚程度。
最初的查询产生了 661 个结果,其中有 4 项比较研究进入最终分析。SCAIF 和 FTT 队列的汇总样本量分别为 100 例和 84 例。SCAIF 与手术时间的缩短相关,具有较大的效应量(SMD,1.65;95%置信区间,0.78-2.52)。2 种手术方式的皮瓣采集面积和围手术期并发症(包括总皮瓣失活率、部分皮瓣坏死率和受区/供区裂开率)相当,研究间存在低至高度异质性。
SCAIF 所需手术时间更短,短期围手术期结果与 FTT 相当。本研究结果支持 SCAIF 作为 FTT 的替代方案的可行性,并为其纳入头颈部大切除和创伤重建的武器库提供了证据。