Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study

Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Sho Yamakawa [verfasserIn] Kenji Hayashida [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2021

Schlagwörter:	Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: BMC Surgery - BMC, 2003, 21(2021), 1, Seite 9
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:21 ; year:2021 ; number:1 ; pages:9

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ004346653

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ004346653
003	DE-627
005	20230309183537.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ004346653
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
050		0	\|a RD1-811
100	0		\|a Sho Yamakawa \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
264		1	\|c 2021
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.
650		4	\|a Free osteocutaneous fibula flap
650		4	\|a Segmental mandibular resection
650		4	\|a Secondary mandibular reconstruction
653		0	\|a Surgery
700	0		\|a Kenji Hayashida \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t BMC Surgery \|d BMC, 2003 \|g 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 \|w (DE-627)331018837 \|w (DE-600)2050442-1 \|x 14712482 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:21 \|g year:2021 \|g number:1 \|g pages:9
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_74
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2003
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 21 \|j 2021 \|e 1 \|h 9

Indexfelder

author_variant	s y sy k h kh
matchkey_str	article:14712482:2021----::aeynefccoscnayadblreosrcinsnaresectnosiualpfesgetladblr
hierarchy_sort_str	2021
callnumber-subject-code	RD
publishDate	2021
allfields	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 doi (DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Sho Yamakawa verfasserin aut Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery Kenji Hayashida verfasserin aut In BMC Surgery BMC, 2003 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 14712482 nnns volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 21 2021 1 9
spelling	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 doi (DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Sho Yamakawa verfasserin aut Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery Kenji Hayashida verfasserin aut In BMC Surgery BMC, 2003 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 14712482 nnns volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 21 2021 1 9
allfields_unstemmed	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 doi (DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Sho Yamakawa verfasserin aut Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery Kenji Hayashida verfasserin aut In BMC Surgery BMC, 2003 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 14712482 nnns volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 21 2021 1 9
allfieldsGer	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 doi (DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Sho Yamakawa verfasserin aut Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery Kenji Hayashida verfasserin aut In BMC Surgery BMC, 2003 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 14712482 nnns volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 21 2021 1 9
allfieldsSound	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 doi (DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng RD1-811 Sho Yamakawa verfasserin aut Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF. Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery Kenji Hayashida verfasserin aut In BMC Surgery BMC, 2003 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 (DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1 14712482 nnns volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9 https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 21 2021 1 9
language	English
source	In BMC Surgery 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9
sourceStr	In BMC Surgery 21(2021), 1, Seite 9 volume:21 year:2021 number:1 pages:9
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction Surgery
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	BMC Surgery
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Sho Yamakawa @@aut@@ Kenji Hayashida @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	331018837
id	DOAJ004346653
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ004346653</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309183537.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ004346653</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sho Yamakawa</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Free osteocutaneous fibula flap</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Segmental mandibular resection</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Secondary mandibular reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kenji Hayashida</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">21(2021), 1, Seite 9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">14712482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:21</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">21</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">9</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
callnumber-first	R - Medicine
author	Sho Yamakawa
spellingShingle	Sho Yamakawa misc RD1-811 misc Free osteocutaneous fibula flap misc Segmental mandibular resection misc Secondary mandibular reconstruction misc Surgery Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
authorStr	Sho Yamakawa
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)331018837
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
callnumber-label	RD1-811
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	14712482
topic_title	RD1-811 Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study Free osteocutaneous fibula flap Segmental mandibular resection Secondary mandibular reconstruction
topic	misc RD1-811 misc Free osteocutaneous fibula flap misc Segmental mandibular resection misc Secondary mandibular reconstruction misc Surgery
topic_unstemmed	misc RD1-811 misc Free osteocutaneous fibula flap misc Segmental mandibular resection misc Secondary mandibular reconstruction misc Surgery
topic_browse	misc RD1-811 misc Free osteocutaneous fibula flap misc Segmental mandibular resection misc Secondary mandibular reconstruction misc Surgery
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	BMC Surgery
hierarchy_parent_id	331018837
hierarchy_top_title	BMC Surgery
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)331018837 (DE-600)2050442-1
title	Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ004346653 (DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a
title_full	Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
author_sort	Sho Yamakawa
journal	BMC Surgery
journalStr	BMC Surgery
callnumber-first-code	R
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2021
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	9
author_browse	Sho Yamakawa Kenji Hayashida
container_volume	21
class	RD1-811
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Sho Yamakawa
doi_str_mv	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
callnumber	RD1-811
title_auth	Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
abstract	Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.
abstractGer	Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_74 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2003 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study
url	https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3 https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482
remote_bool	true
author2	Kenji Hayashida
author2Str	Kenji Hayashida
ppnlink	331018837
callnumber-subject	RD - Surgery
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3
callnumber-a	RD1-811
up_date	2024-07-03T23:17:29.326Z
_version_	1803601732520902656
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ004346653</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230309183537.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230225s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ004346653</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJ23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="050" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">RD1-811</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Sho Yamakawa</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Background Free osteocutaneous fibula flap (FFF) is currently considered the best option for segmental mandibular reconstruction; however, there are only a few reports comparing secondary with primary reconstructions using FFF. This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using FFF when compared with primary mandibular reconstruction. Methods From October 2018 to February 2020, patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF after segmental mandibulectomy were retrospectively reviewed. The size and location of the mandibular defect, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, types of the mandibular plating system, kinds and laterality of the recipient vessels were recorded from the surgical notes. Flap survival, duration of nasogastric tube use, and implant installation after reconstruction were recorded as postoperative evaluation indices. Results Twelve patients underwent mandibular reconstruction using FFF during the study period. There were no significant differences in demographic characteristics other than body mass index between the primary (n = 8) and secondary (n = 4) reconstruction groups. No significant differences were observed in the size and location of defects, the segment length and number of osteotomies in the fibula, and the types of mandibular plating system. There was no significant difference in the kinds of recipient vessels; however, the laterality of recipient vessels was ipsilateral in all cases of primary reconstructions and contralateral in all cases of secondary reconstructions. Three out of eight patients with primary FFF reconstruction developed partial flap necrosis. Four patients in the secondary FFF reconstruction group achieved complete flap survival. The duration of use of the nasogastric tube and implant installation after reconstruction was comparable between the two groups. Conclusion Safe and effective secondary mandibular reconstruction can be performed in this clinical case study using FFF.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Free osteocutaneous fibula flap</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Segmental mandibular resection</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="4"><subfield code="a">Secondary mandibular reconstruction</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Surgery</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kenji Hayashida</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">BMC Surgery</subfield><subfield code="d">BMC, 2003</subfield><subfield code="g">21(2021), 1, Seite 9</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)331018837</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2050442-1</subfield><subfield code="x">14712482</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:21</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:9</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/23089124411d4548a6369c5d40092c1a</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-021-01194-3</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/1471-2482</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_74</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2003</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">21</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">9</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.398793

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Safety and efficacy of secondary mandibular reconstruction using a free osteo-cutaneous fibula flap after segmental mandibular resection: a retrospective case–control study

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?