Search

Background: Facial paralysis reconstruction can be difficult in extensive defects after complex facial or cranial base tumor resection and radiotherapy or when primary smile reanimation attempt has failed. The surgical challenge is more complicated when defects are associated with recipient vessels or nerves depletion. This scenario has not been well described in the literature, and the present article will address the alternatives that plastic surgeons may use in these circumstances., Methods: Seventy-five patients operated in the Hospital Gregorio Marañon between 2008 and 2020, for dynamic reconstruction of facial paralysis, were retrospectively evaluated, collecting data about previous facial nerve surgeries, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, recipient nerve for motor restoration and vessels used for free flaps, type of neurovascular free flap (NVFF), and functional score before and after the facial reanimation surgery. Patients presenting recipient vessel and/or nerve depletion after several facial surgeries requiring a variation from the common NVFF surgical protocol were included in this study., Results: Six cases (8%) with facial paralysis and absent recipient homolateral vessels or nerves after severe cranial base surgery, parotid malignancies, or schwannoma surgery were included. Two patients had an immediate functional reconstruction during the oncologic resection surgery, and 4 patients had a delayed reconstruction. Three patients had previous reconstruction with free flaps, and the vascular pedicles of previous flaps were used for the new NVFF. In the other 3 cases, interposition vein grafts to the contralateral recipient vessels were required to perform NVFF. Masseteric nerve in 4 cases, hypoglossal nerve and posterior branch of the deep temporal nerve in 1 case each, were used as recipient nerves. House-Brackmann score improved in all patients after surgery., Conclusions: Neurovascular free flap can be successfully performed to restore facial motion after depletion of homolateral recipient vessels or nerves after previous facial or cranial base surgeries. In these cases, interposition vascular grafts or the pedicle of previous flaps are essential to provide vascularization as well as an optimal orientation of flaps, to reach recipient nerves in a 1-step procedure., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: none declared., (Copyright © 2022 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Sacropelvic resection is the treatment of choice for pelvic bone tumors and can be associated with intraoperative electron radiotherapy (IOERT) to optimize local control of the disease. Reconstruction with flaps also is essential to avoid pelvic complications. There is scarcity of publications evaluating outcomes of reconstructive procedures associated with IOERT., Methods: A prospective study in 53 patients between 2005 and 2018 was performed. Thirty-four patients received IOERT (group I [GI]) and 19 did not (GII). We examined demographic characteristics, tumor pathology, type of resection and volume of surgical specimen, timing of surgery, IOERT doses, postoperative stay, and complications. We used it for reconstruction rectus abdominis, gluteal, omental and gracilis, superior gluteal artery perforator flap, and free flaps., Results: Colonic adenocarcinoma and chordoma were the most frequent tumors. The median (interquartile range) IOERT dose was 1250 (1000-1250) cGy; operating time was 10.15 (8.6-14.0) hours versus 6.0 (5.0-13.0) hours, hospital stay was 37 (21.2-63.0) days versus 26.0 (12.0-60.0) days, and volume of surgical specimen was 480.5 (88.7-1488.0) mL versus 400 (220.0-6700.0) mL in GI and GII, respectively. Operating time was significantly longer in GI (P < 0.03). There were significant positive correlations between operating time, hospital stay, and volume of surgical specimen. Main complications were exudative wounds (50% vs 31.5%), wound dehiscence (41.1% vs 31.5%), and seroma (29.4% vs 26.3%) in GI and GII, respectively. Complications were similar to previous studies with or without radiotherapy., Conclusions: Under a reconstructive approach, IOERT did not harm flap survival nor increased pelvic complications when compared with similar cases without IOERT., Competing Interests: Conflicts of interest and sources of funding: The authors declare no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2020 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)