Department of Plastic and Hand Surgery, Maria Vittoria Hospital, Via Cibrario, 72 10144, Turin, Italy.
Department of Surgery "Pietro Valdoni" Plastic Surgery Unit, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy.
Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2023 Jun;27(2):283-288. doi: 10.1007/s10006-022-01060-3. Epub 2022 Apr 23.
The radial forearm free flap (RFFF) remains a workhorse in microsurgical reconstruction. Its failure is primarily due to problems with venous drainage; for this reason, controversy on venous anastomosis patterns still exists. This manuscript describes our experience in using a communicating vein to overcome the complications of venous drainage of the RFFF.
Following a review of the vascular anatomy of the RFFF, we retrospectively review the use of the communicating vein and report our results, with the aim of overcoming the dichotomy "superficial versus deep venous system" and "single versus double anastomosis" and discussing the evidence of advantages in using a single microanastomosis with a communicating vein.
Our retrospective review included a total of 123 patients in which a RFFF was performed to reconstruct intraoral defects, performed with a single venous anastomosis using the communicating vein. Four patients (3.25%) required a return to theatre for revision of the venous anastomosis and one case resulted in flap failure due to arterial insufficiency (0.81%).
Our series highlights the constant presence of the communicating vein, although with variations of origin and course that did not preclude the possibility to correctly perform the anastomosis. Advantages of a single microanastomosis with the communicating vein include ease, speed, reliability and versatility in planning the anastomosis. Based on our results, the use of the communicating vein showed comparable and, in some cases, more favourable results when compared to venous anastomotic complications reported in the literature.
游离前臂桡侧皮瓣(RFFF)仍然是显微重建的主力。其失败主要是由于静脉引流问题所致;因此,静脉吻合模式仍存在争议。本文描述了我们使用交通静脉克服 RFFF 静脉引流并发症的经验。
在回顾 RFFF 的血管解剖结构后,我们回顾性地回顾了交通静脉的使用,并报告了我们的结果,旨在克服“浅静脉系统与深静脉系统”和“单吻合与双吻合”的二分法,并讨论使用带交通静脉的单吻合的优势证据。
我们的回顾性研究共纳入了 123 例患者,这些患者均因口腔内缺损而行 RFFF 重建术,采用交通静脉进行单静脉吻合。有 4 名患者(3.25%)需要返回手术室修正静脉吻合术,1 例因动脉供血不足导致皮瓣失败(0.81%)。
我们的研究系列强调了交通静脉的持续存在,尽管其起源和走行存在差异,但并不妨碍正确进行吻合术。使用带交通静脉的单吻合术具有简单、快速、可靠和灵活规划吻合术的优势。根据我们的结果,与文献中报道的静脉吻合并发症相比,使用交通静脉具有可比较的、在某些情况下更有利的结果。