Osteosynthesis for mandibular reconstruction with fibula free flap: Which type and why? A French national survey.

Fibula free flap Mandible Osteosynthesis Plates Reconstruction Screws

Journal

Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery
ISSN: 1878-4119
Titre abrégé: J Craniomaxillofac Surg
Pays: Scotland
ID NLM: 8704309

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
16 Aug 2024
Historique:
received: 26 01 2024
accepted: 12 03 2024
medline: 12 9 2024
pubmed: 12 9 2024
entrez: 11 9 2024
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

We explored the most suitable osteosynthesis type for mandibular reconstruction using fibula free flap (FFF) given the lack of robust data available. For this, an anonymous survey was e-mailed to 853 head-and-neck surgeons (France) asking about their practices and criteria guiding their osteosynthesis material and method choices. Questions assessed: (1) the most frequently used osteosynthesis type, (2) the explanatory variables related to surgeon career status/surgical specialty, and (3) justifications for osteosynthesis type (scientific, technical, "misuse"). Multivariate logistic regression was performed to test for associations of explanatory variables with plate type or misuse. Overall, 118 (13.8%) surgeons responded, among which flexible non-locking osteosynthesis was preferred (59%). Career status and surgical specialty were significantly associated with material choice. University professors/senior lecturers (OR 5.96 vs academic clinical associates; p = 0.02), but not ear-nose-throat/reconstructive plastic surgeons (OR 0.22 vs maxillofacial surgeons; p = 0.04), were more likely to opt for rigid locking osteosynthesis. Private practitioners preferred flexible non-locking osteosynthesis (OR = 5.03; p = 0.04). Only 18% of surgeons scientifically justified their choices. We considered misuse among 65% of surgeons and this was significantly associated with irregular practice of FFF surgery (OR 2.28 vs > 10 surgeries/year; p = 0.04). Overall, >50% of surgeons mainly rely on habits without scientific arguments assisting in decision-making.

Identifiants

pubmed: 39261241
pii: S1010-5182(24)00102-1
doi: 10.1016/j.jcms.2024.03.018
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024 European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interest None of the authors have any conflicts to declare.

Auteurs

Hugo Poncet (H)

Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, University Hospital Center of Toulouse, Place Du Docteur Baylac, 31059, Toulouse, France.

Frédéric Lauwers (F)

Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, University Hospital Center of Toulouse, Place Du Docteur Baylac, 31059, Toulouse, France.

Franck Delanoë (F)

Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, University Hospital Center of Toulouse, Place Du Docteur Baylac, 31059, Toulouse, France.

Alexandra Roux-Trotobas (A)

Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, University Hospital Center of Toulouse, Place Du Docteur Baylac, 31059, Toulouse, France.

Alice Prevost (A)

Plastic and Maxillofacial Surgery Department, Pierre-Paul Riquet Hospital, University Hospital Center of Toulouse, Place Du Docteur Baylac, 31059, Toulouse, France. Electronic address: prevost.a@chu-toulouse.fr.

Classifications MeSH