Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Reconstruction Outcomes Following Lateral Skull Base Resection.

Otology & Neurotology 2017 Februrary
OBJECTIVE: Compare reconstruction outcomes for various lateral skull base closure techniques.

STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective medical records review.

SETTING: University-based tertiary referral center.

PATIENTS: Patients who underwent resections of tumors involving the lateral skull base requiring reconstruction beyond primary closure.

INTERVENTION(S): Reconstructive techniques, from rotational flaps to free tissue transfer.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Outcome data including wound complications, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leakage, and need for surgical revision were tabulated.

RESULTS: Eighty-six patients underwent lateral skull base tumor resection and reconstruction. Procedures were primarily lateral temporal bone resections but also included subtotal temporal bone, total temporal bone, and infratemporal fossa resections. Cutaneous malignancy was the most common resection indication (83%) and the temporalis rotational flap was the most commonly employed reconstructive option (30%). When free tissue transfer techniques were used, the radial forearm, anterolateral thigh, and latissimus dorsi were the most frequent donor sites. Patients with T2 disease were more likely to undergo temporalis flaps, whereas patients with T4 disease were more likely to undergo free flap reconstruction. Major complications were uncommon (∼8%), the most frequent being stroke (∼3%). The postoperative wound complication rate was approximately 45%. The majority involved minor dehiscences and were managed conservatively. Patients with T4 disease were more likely to have wound complications (p < 0.05). Radial forearm free flaps were less likely to have wound complications when compared with other reconstruction techniques (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: Many factors go into planning lateral skull base reconstruction. Free flaps were more often used for T4 disease. Radial forearm free flaps tended to have lower wound complication rates when compared with other techniques.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app