Kadam Dinesh
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, A. J. Institute of Medical Sciences, Mangalore, Karnataka, India.
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2019 Dec;12(4):274-283. doi: 10.1055/s-0039-1685460. Epub 2019 Mar 29.
Primary restoration of the mandibular continuity remains the standard of care for defects, and yet several constraints preclude this objective. Interim reconstructions with plate and nonvascular bone grafts have high failure rates. The secondary reconstruction, when becomes inevitable, remains a formidable task. This retrospective study evaluates various issues to address secondary reconstruction. Twenty-one patients following mandibulectomy presented with various complications between 2012 and 2016 were included in the study. The profile of primary reconstruction includes reconstruction plate ( = 9), reconstruction plate with rib graft ( = 3), soft tissue only reconstruction ( = 4), free fibula ( = 2), inadequate growth of reconstructed free fibula during adolescence ( = 1), nonvascular bone graft alone ( = 1), and no reconstruction ( = 1). All had problems or complications related to unsatisfactory primary reconstruction such as plate fracture, recurrent infection, plate exposure, deformity, malocclusion, and failed fibula reconstruction. All were reconstructed with osteocutaneous free fibula flap with repair of soft-tissue loss. All flaps survived and had satisfactory outcome functionally and aesthetically. Dental rehabilitation was done in four patients. One flap was reexplored for thrombosis and salvaged. The challenges in secondary reconstruction include difficulty in recreating true defects, extensive fibrosis and loss of planes, unanticipated soft-tissue and skeletal defects, reestablishing the contour and occlusion, insufficient bone strength, dearth of suitable recipient vessels, nonpliable skin, tissue contraction to accommodate new mandible, need of additional flap for defect closure, and postirradiation effects. Notwithstanding them, the reasonable successful outcome can be attainable.
下颌骨连续性的一期修复仍然是缺损治疗的标准方法,然而一些限制因素妨碍了这一目标的实现。使用钢板和非血管化骨移植的临时重建失败率很高。二次重建在不可避免时仍然是一项艰巨的任务。这项回顾性研究评估了二次重建中需要解决的各种问题。本研究纳入了2012年至2016年间21例下颌骨切除术后出现各种并发症的患者。一期重建的情况包括:重建钢板(n = 9)、带肋骨移植的重建钢板(n = 3)、仅软组织重建(n = 4)、游离腓骨(n = 2)、青春期重建游离腓骨生长不足(n = 1)、单独的非血管化骨移植(n = 1)以及未进行重建(n = 1)。所有患者都存在与不满意的一期重建相关的问题或并发症,如钢板骨折、反复感染、钢板外露、畸形、咬合不正和腓骨重建失败。所有患者均采用带骨皮的游离腓骨瓣进行重建,并修复软组织缺损。所有皮瓣均存活,功能和美观效果均令人满意。4例患者进行了牙修复。1例皮瓣因血栓形成接受再次探查并成功挽救。二次重建的挑战包括难以重现真正的缺损、广泛的纤维化和层次丧失、意外的软组织和骨骼缺损、重新建立轮廓和咬合关系、骨强度不足、缺乏合适的受体血管、皮肤不柔韧、组织收缩以适应新的下颌骨、需要额外的皮瓣来闭合缺损以及放疗后的影响。尽管如此,仍可获得合理的成功结果。