Comparative evaluation of nasolabial flap and buccal fat pad flap in the surgical management of oral submucous fibrosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE

Oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) is a chronic, potentially malignant condition affecting any part of the oral cavity and is prevalent in Southeast Asia and the Indian subcontinent. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of buccal fat pad flap with the nasolabial flap in the management of OSMF.

METHODS

We systematically compared two commonly used constructive techniques in the management of OSMF: the buccal pad of fat flap and the nasolabial flap. We performed a comprehensive search in four databases for all articles published between 1982 and November 2021. We assessed the risk of bias using the Cochrane Handbook and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. We used the mean difference (MD) for pooling the data with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and evaluated the heterogeneity between pooled studies using χ and I tests.

RESULTS

Out of 917 studies, six were included in this review. The meta-analysis significantly favored conventional nasolabial flap over buccal fat pad flap in improving the maximal mouth opening (MD, - 2.52; 95% CI, - 4.44 to - 0.60; P = 0.01; I = 0%) after OSMF reconstructive surgery. Conversely, when it comes to esthetic outcomes, these studies favored buccal fat pad flap.

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis found that nasolabial flap was better than buccal fat pad flap in terms of mouth opening restoration after OSMF reconstructive surgery. Also, the included studies found better results, favoring nasolabial flap over buccal fat pad flap in terms of oral commissural width restoration. Also, these studies reported better outcomes in terms of esthetics, favoring buccal fat pad flap. Further studies with larger sample sizes and different populations/races are needed to confirm our findings.