Daniell C H, Fee W E
Head Neck Surg. 1987 Jan-Feb;9(3):167-71. doi: 10.1002/hed.2890090307.
MacFee (double horizontal) incisions have often been criticized for transecting the dominant blood supply of the central bipedicled cervical flap. To assess the viability of this flap we reviewed our recent surgical data. Ninety-three patients who underwent 100 radical neck dissections were evaluated retrospectively for cervical skin viability after surgery. MacFee incisions were used in 50 of these; in the remaining 50 a variety of other incisions were used. With MacFee incisions no ischemic tissue loss resulted. By contrast, six patients (12%) in the comparison group experienced partial flap necrosis due to ischemia. Chi-square analysis shows this difference to be statistically significant (P less than 0.01). This study shows the bipedicled cervical flap to be durable, dependable, and sufficiently vascularized to prevent ischemic tissue loss, even when incisions were previously placed in the ipsilateral neck or antecedent radiation therapy was delivered.
麦克菲(双水平)切口常因切断中央双蒂颈部皮瓣的主要血供而受到批评。为评估该皮瓣的活力,我们回顾了近期的手术数据。对93例行100次根治性颈清扫术的患者术后颈部皮肤活力进行了回顾性评估。其中50例采用了麦克菲切口;其余50例采用了各种其他切口。采用麦克菲切口未出现缺血性组织丢失。相比之下,对照组有6例患者(12%)因缺血出现部分皮瓣坏死。卡方分析显示这种差异具有统计学意义(P<0.01)。本研究表明,即使之前在同侧颈部做过切口或接受过前期放疗,双蒂颈部皮瓣依然耐用、可靠且血供充足,可防止缺血性组织丢失。