Scholarlink

Purpose <p>The facial artery myomucosal (FAMM) flap (conventional FAMM flap) and the tunnelized FAMM island flap (tunnelized FAMM flap) are established techniques for oral cavity reconstruction. However, evidence on complications rates is limited to small cohorts, and long-term quality of life (QoL) data are lacking. This study aimed to (1) determine the prevalence of complications, (2) identify risk factors for complications, and (3) compare QoL outcomes between patients with conventional and tunnelized flaps.</p> Methods <p>This single-center, retrospective study included all patients, who underwent oral cavity cancer ablation with reconstruction using either a unilateral conventional or tunnelized FAMM flap between 2018 and 2025. Demographics, surgical details, complications, and EORTC QLQ-H&amp;N35 scores at 12-, 24-, and 36-months were analyzed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed.</p> Results <p>In total, 141 patients were included, reconstructed with either conventional (<i>n</i> = 114, 81%) or tunnelized (<i>n</i> = 27, 19%) FAMM flaps. Complications occurred in 18 patients (13%), including partial (<i>n</i> = 7) or total (<i>n</i> = 5) flap necrosis, hematoma (<i>n</i> = 5), and infection (<i>n</i> = 1). Tunnelized FAMM flaps were associated with significantly higher complication rates (37%) compared with those receiving a conventional FAMM flap (7%; <i>p</i> &lt; 0.001). Flap type was the only statistically significant risk factor for complications in multivariate analyses. Long-term QoL outcomes were similar between groups.</p> Conclusion <p>Based on our cohort and surgical techniques (without including the facial vein in the tunnelized FAMM flap), the conventional FAMM flap was a safe and reliable flap, while the tunnelized FAMM flap was associated with increased risk of complications and without QoL benefits.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Conventional vs. tunnelized facial artery myomucosal flaps in oral cavity reconstruction: a comparative analysis of outcomes and quality of life

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年4月23日

查看全文
  • Kasper Basse Reinholdt,
  • Søren Dührr Gade,
  • Arunas Pikelis,
  • Tejs Ehlers Klug

摘要

Purpose

The facial artery myomucosal (FAMM) flap (conventional FAMM flap) and the tunnelized FAMM island flap (tunnelized FAMM flap) are established techniques for oral cavity reconstruction. However, evidence on complications rates is limited to small cohorts, and long-term quality of life (QoL) data are lacking. This study aimed to (1) determine the prevalence of complications, (2) identify risk factors for complications, and (3) compare QoL outcomes between patients with conventional and tunnelized flaps.

Methods

This single-center, retrospective study included all patients, who underwent oral cavity cancer ablation with reconstruction using either a unilateral conventional or tunnelized FAMM flap between 2018 and 2025. Demographics, surgical details, complications, and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 scores at 12-, 24-, and 36-months were analyzed. Uni- and multivariate analyses were performed.

Results

In total, 141 patients were included, reconstructed with either conventional (n = 114, 81%) or tunnelized (n = 27, 19%) FAMM flaps. Complications occurred in 18 patients (13%), including partial (n = 7) or total (n = 5) flap necrosis, hematoma (n = 5), and infection (n = 1). Tunnelized FAMM flaps were associated with significantly higher complication rates (37%) compared with those receiving a conventional FAMM flap (7%; p < 0.001). Flap type was the only statistically significant risk factor for complications in multivariate analyses. Long-term QoL outcomes were similar between groups.

Conclusion

Based on our cohort and surgical techniques (without including the facial vein in the tunnelized FAMM flap), the conventional FAMM flap was a safe and reliable flap, while the tunnelized FAMM flap was associated with increased risk of complications and without QoL benefits.