Donor-Site Outcomes of the Superficial Circumflex Iliac Artery Perforator Flap Versus Radial Forearm Flap in Unilateral Tongue Reconstruction: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 42746856.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1002/hed.70478.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
We compared the superficial circumflex iliac artery perforator (SCIP) flap with the radial forearm flap (RFF) to identify limitations restricting its widespread use. We retrospectively evaluated unilateral tongue reconstruction using propensity score matching for age, sex, T stage, body mass index, and Charlson comorbidity index from a nonfunctional perspective. Matching 118 patients yielded 27 pairs. Flap survival was comparable. SCIP improved donor-site aesthetics (92.6% vs. 40.7%), preserved strength (100.0% vs. 66.7%), and shortened hospitalization (10.9 vs. 11.9 days). Overall recipient-site and flap-related complications were significantly higher (33.3% vs. 3.7%), driven by Grades I-II events (25.9% vs. 0%). No individual complication category differed significantly. SCIP had a shorter pedicle, more tracheotomies, and greater superior thyroid artery use. Before matching, salvage failed in 5/5 SCIP versus 2/5 RFF cases, an exploratory finding. SCIP improves donor-site outcomes, but more low-grade complications and vessel considerations may limit widespread adoption.