2014
DOI: 10.1159/000355287
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Oncologic Validity of Recipient Vessel Preservation in Microvascular Free-Flap Reconstruction

Abstract: Objectives: The use of free-flap reconstruction requires a more limited neck dissection to allow for microvascular anastomosis. This study seeks to determine the oncologic validity of cervical vessel preservation. Materials and Methods: The current study is a prospective review of cervical vessel biopsies from patients undergoing resection of squamous cell carcinoma (SCCA) tumors of the head and neck with free tissue reconstruction. Results: From June 2010 to March 2012, 227 recipient vessel biopsies were perf… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From what is available, it is only recommended to insure primary tissue transfer (as discussed above). However, all of tumor stage, positive margins, lymphovascular invasions, and the use of vein grafts significantly correlated with worse overall survival and flap complications [44,45], Furthermore, even though all recipient arteries may potentially be in immediacy to the primary tumor or its metastatic counterpart, random recipient vessel selection and biopsy has no impact on treatment or prognosis (local cancer recurrence, regional cancer recurrence, or distant metastases) [46]. It is however, recommended to biopsy grossly abnormal recipient vessel that are apparent at the time of flap transfer to determine the pathological status of recipient vessel trimmings [46].…”
Section: Oncological Safetymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From what is available, it is only recommended to insure primary tissue transfer (as discussed above). However, all of tumor stage, positive margins, lymphovascular invasions, and the use of vein grafts significantly correlated with worse overall survival and flap complications [44,45], Furthermore, even though all recipient arteries may potentially be in immediacy to the primary tumor or its metastatic counterpart, random recipient vessel selection and biopsy has no impact on treatment or prognosis (local cancer recurrence, regional cancer recurrence, or distant metastases) [46]. It is however, recommended to biopsy grossly abnormal recipient vessel that are apparent at the time of flap transfer to determine the pathological status of recipient vessel trimmings [46].…”
Section: Oncological Safetymentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From what is available, it is only recommended to insure primary tissue transfer (as discussed above). However, all of tumor stage, positive margins, lymphovascular invasions, and the use of vein grafts significantly correlated with worse overall survival and flap complications [44,45], Furthermore, even though all recipient arteries may potentially be in immediacy to the primary tumor or its metastatic counterpart, random recipient vessel selection and biopsy has no impact on treatment or prognosis (local cancer recurrence, regional cancer recurrence, or distant metastases) [46]. It is however, recommended to biopsy grossly abnormal recipient vessel that are apparent at the time of flap transfer to determine the pathological status of recipient vessel trimmings [46].…”
Section: Oncological Safetymentioning
confidence: 99%