Aesthetic cervicofacial surgery for head and neck tumor patients

Aesthetic Considerations of Simultaneous Reconstruction With Free Flap for Local Advanced Hypopharyngeal Combined With Cervical Esophageal Cancer

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Patients with local advanced hypopharyngeal combined with esophageal cancer often require total laryngectomy and cervical esophagectomy, which result in big-sized upper aerodigestive tract defects and neck deformities. Although free flap is widely used to reconstruct aerodigestive defects, the aesthetic results especially that of neck contour have not brought to the forefront or discussed extensively. This article aims to report the preliminary aesthetic results of free flap reconstruction for local advanced hypopharyngeal cancer combined with cervical esophageal cancer defects, highlighting the thickness of subcutaneous fat of the flap.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 21 patients with local advanced hypopharyngeal combined with cervical esophageal cancer from July 2010 to August 2022 was conducted. After completing total laryngectomy, bilateral neck dissection, and removal of the tumor with safe margin, a free thigh flap of subcutaneous fat greater than 1 cm in thickness was used to reconstruct the hypopharyngeal and cervical esophageal defects. In addition to general demographic, oncological, and reconstructive data, preoperative and postoperative neck circumferences were recorded and compared. A subjective questionnaire survey was conducted on patients' satisfaction with postoperative neck contour. The patients were followed up from 3 to 10 years, with an average of 3 years.

RESULTS

There were 2 cases (2/21) of free flap loss because of flap necrosis and secondary repair with a pedicled pectoralis major flap. Nineteen flaps (19/21) survived. Three cases (3/21) developed a pharyngeal fistula and one case (1/21) experienced salivary fistula, all of the fistulae healed after drainage and dressing change. There was a relatively high satisfaction rate among patients (16/21) with the postoperative neck contour. A paired sample t test showed no statistically significant difference between the preoperative and postoperative values ( t = 2.002, P > 0.05). Patients with a thicker subcutaneous fat flap (≥1.5 cm) had a more symmetrical and fuller neck contour during long-term postoperative follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of a fat-rich subcutaneous free thigh flap to reconstruct the defect of local advanced hypopharyngeal combined with cervical esophageal cancer can achieve better neck aesthetic contour.

Facelift Surgery Following Superficial Parotidectomy: Is it Safe?

INTRODUCTION

Patients who have previously undergone superficial parotidectomy may also seek facelift surgery for facial aging and rejuvenation. These patients present unique challenges compared to a standard facelift patient. Most concerning is the location of facial nerve branches, which may be superficial and displaced. In addition, significant contour deformities and abnormal scar patterns may be present. The purpose of the study is to review our series of patients and assess potential morbidity and safety of facelift surgery in superficial parotidectomy patients.

METHODS

A retrospective case series was performed reviewing all patients who underwent facelift surgery following superficial parotidectomy from 2000 to 2017. Data were collected for: postoperative facial nerve deficit, soft tissue contour and scar deformities, facelift technique, ancillary soft tissue augmentation procedures and pre- and postoperative photographs. An evidence-based treatment algorithm to address specific problems in this patient population was developed.

RESULTS

A total of seven patients were identified who underwent facelift surgery following parotidectomy. Patients underwent one of the standard SMAS procedure on the non-parotidectomy side, and surgical modifications were made to address the parotidectomy side; soft tissue augmentation was performed in two patients. Precautions to identify the facial nerve and prevent injury, including nerve monitoring and stimulation, were utilized in all seven patients. No permanent postoperative facial nerve injury was noted.

CONCLUSION

Facelift following superficial parotidectomy was safely performed in all cases. Special consideration should be given to contour deformities, facial nerve location and scar placement. However, if approached properly, these patients can still be considered as suitable candidates for facelift surgery.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these evidence-based medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Cervicofacial rhytidectomy after head and neck tumor removal

OBJECTIVE

To compare intraoperative and postoperative complication rates of cervicofacial rhytidectomy after head and neck tumor removal with complication rates of rhytidectomy in the normal patient population.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective chart review and literature review.

METHODS

A sample of 11 patients treated by a single surgeon (D.A.S.) at an academic referral center who met the inclusion criteria was reviewed for previous head and neck surgical history, medical history, and surgical results and subsequent complications of the facial esthetic procedure. These rates were compared with the complication rates for cervicofacial rhytidectomy in normal patients as quoted in the general medical literature.

RESULTS

Patients ranged in age from 48 to 75 years (mean age, 58 y). Of the 11, no patient experienced a major complication of rhytidectomy, and two experienced a minor postoperative complication. Both patients had received postoperative radiation for the treatment of their previous tumor, and both noted a small (<1.5 cm) area of wound dehiscence before postoperative day 10, which required no revision and healed without sequelae. No other intraoperative or postoperative complications were found.

CONCLUSION

Cervicofacial rhytidectomy may be safely and effectively performed on postoperative patients with head and neck tumors without increased incidence of major complications when compared with patients without a surgical tumor history. The increased incidence of minor wound dehiscence experienced by 2 of the 3 patients who received postoperative radiation in this study may indicate that small areas of skin incision dehiscence are more likely in patients who have been radiated. Surgeons performing rhytidectomy on patients with head and neck tumors who were previously radiated should consider more meticulous subdermal closure to avoid such dehiscence. Patients should be informed of the slightly higher risk of dehiscence before surgery.