The surgical incision plays a pivotal role in any surgical procedure. A good surgical approach should allow optimal visualization, respect the anatomy and ensure the best aesthetic outcome possible, especially when the lesions involve the face. In this retrospective study, carried out from June 2014 to April 2018, different types of surgical approaches to perform mandibular reconstruction were compared. Twentyone patients who underwent mandibular reconstruction with free fibular flap (FFFs) using CAD-CAM technology and Virtual Surgical Planning (VSP) were included in the study, regardless the condition, the timing of reconstruction (primary vs secondary), the number of fibular segments or the type and size of the mandibular defect. The patients were treated for mandibular defects secondary to benign or low-grade oncological lesions and different non-oncological conditions. However, patients requiring neck dissection were excluded from the study. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of surgical approach used: 7 patients received a traditional transcervical approach together with an intraoral approach, while 14 patients were operated through an intraoral approach combined with different microinvasive approaches, including the sub-mandibular, the retro-mandibular and the preauricular approaches. Different factors were statistically compared: characteristics of the harvested fibula, surgical timing, days of hospitalization, as well as complication, functional and aesthetic outcomes. According to this study, no statistically significant differences were observed between the two groups in any of the features considered. These results support the hypothesis that the combination of different microinvasive approaches and the traditional approach are superimposable, and they can be safely exchanged when the underlying defects allow it.
|Journal||Journal of Biological Regulators and Homeostatic Agents|
|Issue number||5 Suppl. 3|
|Publication status||Published - 2020|