• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Risk Level Varies during Free Flap Reconstruction of Glossectomy Defects

by Literature Reviews • July 11, 2017

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

What are the preoperative variables, mean operative time, morbidity, and mortality associated with reconstruction of partial glossectomy defects?

Bottom line
Free flap reconstruction of glossectomy defects involving up to half of the tongue is associated with increased morbidity and operative time when compared with nonflap reconstruction. Currently available functional outcomes data for tongue reconstruction are poor. Possible functional impairment must be weighed against the associated morbidity when deciding which defects require reconstruction, and the decision to reconstruct should not be taken lightly.

You Might Also Like

  • Free Flap Surgery Viable Choice for Mandible Reconstruction
  • Patient Age Correlates with Medical, Not Surgical, Complications Following Free Flap Reconstruction
  • Regional Flap vs. Free Flap Reconstruction: Point–Counterpoint
  • Optimal Management of Vascular Pedicle Is an Important Concern in Facial Free Flap Reconstruction
Explore This Issue
July 2017

Background: The tongue remains the most common site of primary oral cavity malignant neoplasms. The type of reconstruction used for defects following ablative surgical treatment of tongue cancer is highly dependent on the extent of the resection. Tongue resections are generally classified into four groups: partial, hemi, subtotal, and total glossectomy. The degree of swallowing and speech functional impairment is dependent on the extent of tissue removed as well as the degree of functionality of residual tongue tissue. Algorithms have been established to dictate the most adequate types of reconstructions available for a given size of glossectomy defect. Over recent years, several quality of life (QOL) instruments have been adapted to study the head and neck population. Interestingly, certain studies have shown that patients undergoing reconstructions of small partial glossectomy defects may actually have worse QOL scores related to speech and swallowing than those undergoing primary closure or granulation. Furthermore, overall QOL scores of patients undergoing partial glossectomies with primary closures or granulation have been shown to be reasonably high, substantiating the argument that patients undergoing limited glossectomies should be spared the potential added morbidity of free flap reconstructions.

Study Design: Retrospective data analysis.

Synopsis: The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database was queried for patients who had received glossectomy procedures. The study sample was split into two groups based on the lack or presence of a flap reconstruction. A total of 1,012 glossectomy patients were identified, with 805 undergoing nonflap reconstruction and 207 undergoing free flap reconstruction. Variables evaluated included wound complications, major and minor morbidity, return to the operating room, mortality, and mean operative time. Patients undergoing free flap reconstruction experienced significantly longer mean operative times (482.1 vs. 183.0 minutes), were more likely to return to the operating room, and had higher likelihood of wound complications, major morbidity, and minor morbidity. There was no difference in mortality between groups (See Figure 1).

Pages: 1 2 | Single Page

Filed Under: Facial Plastic/Reconstructive, Literature Reviews Tagged With: facial reconstruction, Free Flap Reconstruction, glossectomy defects, morbidity rate, riskIssue: July 2017

You Might Also Like:

  • Free Flap Surgery Viable Choice for Mandible Reconstruction
  • Patient Age Correlates with Medical, Not Surgical, Complications Following Free Flap Reconstruction
  • Regional Flap vs. Free Flap Reconstruction: Point–Counterpoint
  • Optimal Management of Vascular Pedicle Is an Important Concern in Facial Free Flap Reconstruction

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939