Volume 86, Issue 5 pp. 337-342
REVIEW ARTICLE

Mandibular reconstruction: meta-analysis of iliac- versus fibula-free flaps

Sarah Lonie

Corresponding Author

Sarah Lonie

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

These authors contributed equally to this work.

Correspondence

Dr Sarah Lonie, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, 41 Victoria Parade, Fitzroy, Vic. 3065, Australia. Email: [email protected]

Search for more papers by this author
Pradyumna Herle

Pradyumna Herle

O'Brien Institute Tissue Engineering Centre, Regenerative Surgery Group, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

These authors contributed equally to this work.Search for more papers by this author
Alenka Paddle

Alenka Paddle

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Neelprada Pradhan

Neelprada Pradhan

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Theo Birch

Theo Birch

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
Ramin Shayan

Ramin Shayan

Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, St Vincent's Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

O'Brien Institute Tissue Engineering Centre, Regenerative Surgery Group, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 01 September 2015
Citations: 78
S. Lonie MBBS (Hons), BMedSci, PGDipAnat; P. Herle MBBS, BMedSci; A. Paddle MBBS (Hons), PGDipAnat, FRACS (Plastics); N. Pradhan MBBS; T. Birch MBBS; R. Shayan MBBS, BMedSci, PGDipAnat, PhD, FRACS (Plastics).

Abstract

Background

Free vascularized bone flaps are widely recognized as the optimal reconstruction for patients who undergo mandibular resection. The fibula-free flap is currently considered the gold standard, workhorse flap for mandibular reconstruction. Although previous studies have analysed individual success of each flap type, few have compared iliac- and fibula-free flaps.

Methods

A systematic review of the literature was conducted in line with the PRISMA protocol searching the PubMed and EBSCO databases. Twenty-four studies were included as per predetermined inclusion criteria. Double-arm random effect meta-analysis was conducted with STATA 12, and single-arm meta-analysis was conducted utilizing Meta-XL.

Results

The results of this meta-analysis confirm that there is no significant difference in total flap loss between fibula- and iliac-free flap reconstruction of mandibular defects. In terms of recipient site complication, there was a significantly higher risk of delayed healing and suture line breakdown in the iliac flap group (P = 0.05). Donor site complications showed a trend towards being higher in the fibula flap group. Osseointegrated dental implant loss in fibula flaps was higher than in iliac flaps (5.3% compared with 1.7%).

Conclusion

Both iliac- and fibula-free flaps should be considered for use in mandibular reconstruction. We suggest the iliac crest as the first choice for mandibular angle or body defects (better contour match) or also defects requiring greater soft-tissue bulk for intra-oral lining. The fibula flap is best when bony length is required such as in subtotal or total mandibulectomy.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.