Patients with cancer have an increased risk of developing severe forms of coronavirus disease 2019, and patients with advanced cancer who are followed at home represent a particularly frail population. Although with substantial differences, the challenges that cancer care professionals have to face during a pandemic are quite similar to those posed by natural disasters. We have already managed the oncological home care service in L'Aquila (middle Italy) after the 2009 earthquake. With this letter, we want to share the procedures and tools that we have started using at the home care service of the Tuscany Tumor Association during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic.

a b s t r a c tPurpose: Investigators have hypothesised that piezoelectric surgical device could permanently replace traditional saws in conventional orthognathic surgery. Methods: Twelve consecutive patients who underwent bimaxillary procedures were involved in the study. In six patients the right maxillary and mandible osteotomies were performed using traditional saw, whilst the left osteotomies by piezoosteotomy; in the remaining six patients, the surgical procedures were reversed. Intraoperative blood loss, procedure duration time, incision precision, postoperative swelling and haematoma, and nerve impairment were evaluated to compare the outcomes and costs of these two procedures. Results: Compare to traditional mechanical surgery, piezoosteotomy showed a significant intraoperative blood loss reduction of 25% (p ¼ 0.0367), but the mean surgical procedure duration was longer by 35% (p ¼ 0.0018). Moreover, the use of piezoosteotomy for mandible procedure required more time than for the maxillary surgery (p ¼ 0.0003). There was a lower incidence of postoperative haematoma and swelling following piezoosteotomy, and a statistically significant reduction in postoperative nerve impairment (p ¼ 0.003). Conclusions: We believe that piezoelectric device allows surgeons to achieve better results compared to a traditional surgical saw, especially in terms of intraoperative blood loss, postoperative swelling and nerve impairment. This device represents a less aggressive and safer method to perform invasive surgical procedures such as a Le Fort I osteotomy. However, we recommend the use of traditional saw in mandible surgery because it provides more foreseeable outcomes and well-controlled osteotomy. Further studies are needed to analyse whether piezoosteotomy could prevent relapse and promote bony union in larger advancements. Ó

BackgroundThe aim of this investigation was to systematically review the current literature to provide the best data for indications, outcomes, survival, and complication rates of pedicled propeller perforator flaps for upper body defects.MethodsA comprehensive literature review for articles published from January 1991 to December 2011 was performed using the PubMed, Medline, and Cochrane Databases. Articles without available full-text, single case reports or papers with excessive missing data were excluded. Papers reporting pedicle-perforator (propeller) flaps used for lower extremity reconstruction were excluded from meta-analysis.ResultsFrom the initial 1,736 studies our search yielded, 343 studies qualified for the second stage of selection. Of 117 full-text reports screened, 41 studies, met the definitive inclusion and exclusion criteria. Of the selected 41 articles, 26 were case series, original papers or retrospective reviews and were included, whereas 15 were case report papers and therefore were excluded. Two hundred ninety-five propeller flaps were reported to have been used in a total of 283 patients. Indications include repair of trauma-induced injuries, post-trauma revision surgery, cancer resection, chronic infection, pressure sores, and chronic ulcers with a major complication rate (3.3%) comparable to that of free flaps. No specific exclusion criteria for the procedure were presented in the studies reviewed.ConclusionsPedicled propeller flaps are a versatile and safe reconstructive option that are easy and quick to raise and that provide unlimited clinical solutions because of the theoretical possibility of harvesting them based on any perforator chosen among those classified in the body.

No abstract

The subfascial dissection of anterolateral thigh flaps revealed that the safest method for minimizing vascular complications accounted for a 3.1% probability for marginal necrosis, which can be managed conservatively. The overall breakdown of the vascular-related complications that followed flap thinning totals 13.4% and can be broken down as follows: partial flap loss of 4.1%, partial distal necrosis of 3.5%, marginal necrosis of 3.1%, and total flap loss of 2.5%.