RECONSTRUCTION OF ORAL CAVITY DEFECTS FOLLOWING ONCOLOGIC RESECTION

Anh Bích Trần, Văn Dương Trần, Vân Anh Hoàng

Main Article Content

Abstract

Introduction: Radical surgery is considered as the cornerstone, but often results in large defects of the oral cavity, leading to severe impairment of chewing, swallowing and aesthetics. Therefore, reconstruction is essential to restore vital functions and improve the quality of life. Objectives: To evaluate the outcomes of various flap applications in reconstructing defects following oral cavity resection at Cho Ray Hospital from 2020 to 2025. Patients and methods: A descriptive cross-sectional and interventional clinical study was conducted on 83 patients with oral cavity cancer who underwent ablative surgery and immediate reconstruction at the Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Cho Ray Hospital, between 2020 and 2025. Results: Our study employed the following reconstructive flaps: 34 nasolabial flaps, 38 buccal mucosal flaps, 4 submental flaps, 1 iliac crest flap, 3 anterolateral thigh flaps, 2 fibular flaps, and 1 radial forearm flap. The flap survival rate reached 100%, with no major postoperative complications observed. The mean operative time was approximately 210 minutes, and the average hospital stay was 10 days. At 3-month follow-up, most patients had regained masticatory and swallowing functions; aesthetic outcomes were rated as good, and no local recurrence was detected. Conclusions: Flexible application of appropriate flaps—including local, regional, and free flaps—is an effective strategy for reconstructing defects after oral cavity cancer surgery. These techniques preserve essential functions, maintain aesthetic form, and improve the overall quality of life for patients.

Article Details

References

Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2022: GLOBOCAN estimates. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023. doi:10.3322/caac.21767.
2. Zhuang C, Chen H, Chen Z, Xu L, Cao W, Wang Y, et al. Submental flap versus radial forearm free flap for oral tongue reconstruction: functional outcomes. J Laryngol Otol. 2020;134(2): 120-6. doi:10.1017/ S0022215119002484.
3. Wei FC, Mardini S, Chen HC, Chen SH, Tsai YT, Lin CH. Free flap survival in head and neck reconstruction: 95–98% success. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140(5):843e-849e. doi:10.1097/PRS. 0000000000003803.
4. Fung K, Kim J, Arnaoutakis D, Richmon J, Gourin C. Free flap outcomes in elderly head and neck cancer patients. Head Neck. 2019;41(1):132-8. doi:10.1002/hed.25477.
5. Sun G, Lu M, Hu Q, Tang E. Free flap reconstruction for oral cancer in China: a report of 1,580 cases. Head Neck. 2021;43(2):435-45. doi:10.1002/hed.26499.
6. Drisco BP, Baker SR. Reconstruction of nasal alar defects. Arch Facial Plast Surg. 2001;3(2):91-9. doi:10.1001/archfaci.3.2.91.
7. Joshi P, Bavaskar M, Shetty R, Singh A, Nair S, Chaturvedi P. Local flap reconstructions in oral cavity defects: An insight from 104 cases. Rambam Maimonides Med J. 2024;15(3):e0012. doi:10.5041/RMMJ.10526.
8. Dean YE, Motawea KR, Bamousa BAA, Al-Qarni AA, El-Sharkawy SA, et al. Early oral feeding and its impact on postoperative outcomes in head and neck cancer surgery: a meta-analysis. Maxillofac Plast Reconstr Surg. 2024;46:11. doi:10.1186/s40902-024-00421-0.
9. Ranganath K, Jalisi SM, Naples JG, Gomez ED. Comparing outcomes of radial forearm free flaps and anterolateral thigh free flaps in oral cavity reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Oral Oncol. 2022;135:106214. doi:10.1016/j.oraloncology.2022.106214.
10. Wu HY, Shan XF, Cai ZG, Zhang J, Li PJ, Zhang L, et al. Timing of oral feeding in patients who have undergone free flap reconstruction for oral cancer. Laryngoscope. 2023;133(6):1382–1387. doi:10.1002/lary.30435.