Unplanned Hospital Readmission and Visit to the Emergency Room in the First Thirty Days after Head and Neck Surgery: A Prospective, Single-center Study

Abstract Introduction Head and neck surgery remains a complex field; the patients can suffer important functional or life-threating complications after treatment that need unplanned readmissions, increasing the cost related to the treatment. Objective To evaluate the incidence risk factors and causes associated with 30-day unplanned hospital readmission and visit to the emergency room (ER) after surgery for head and neck cancer. Methods Prospective, longitudinal, nonrandomized study. Results A total of 834 patients were included, 726 in the major surgery group and 108 in the minor surgery group. The 30-day readmission rate for all causes was of 7,9% for the patients treated by a major surgery and of 0% for the patients treated in the outpatient clinic for minor procedures, to a total readmission rate of 6,8%. The rate of visit to the emergency room for all causes in the first 30 days was of 14% for the patients treated by a major surgery and of 2,7% for the patients treated in the outpatient clinic. Conclusion Major surgery, the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) status and type of wound are conditions related to unplanned readmission or visit to the ER in the first 30 day after discharge. The most commonly associated causes are infections or wound complications. An evidence-based risk stratification of the patients can be important to improve decision-making and resource utilization. An educational strategy can provide possible ways to improve the rate of readmission and reduce the amount of money expended by healthcare systems.

Submental Artery Island Flap in Oral Cavity Reconstruction. An Observational, Retrospective Two-centre Study

Abstract Introduction The submental flap provides an alternative technique in orofacial reconstruction, especially in situations in which free flaps are not available, or the patients are unfit. Objective To demonstrate the oncological safety and benefits of this flap in oral cavity reconstruction. Methods A total of 14 patients with oral cavity cancers, who underwent submental flap reconstruction from January 2016 to January 2018, were included in the study. Results There were 11 male and 3 female patients with a mean age of 66.7 ± 14 (Min: 52/Max: 91) years old. The most common primary tumor site was the mobile tongue in 12 (85.7 %) patients. All of the patients underwent ipsilateral selective neck dissection after the flap was harvested. Flap partial necrosis was observed in one patient, and total necrosis in another one. The mean follow-up was of one year. Nonlocal or regional recurrences were observed. Conclusion Submental island flap represents a good option in oral cavity reconstruction in a restricted setting or in patients considered not fit for free flap reconstruction. Preoperative selection of clinically neck node-negative patients is essential due to the potential risk of occult metastasis.

Functional Results of Transverse Extended Incision in Cervical Neck Dissection

Abstract Introduction Multiple incisions have been described for the surgical approach of cervical neck nodes. All of these descriptions are associated with better or worse exposure of the surgical field as well as with different functional and aesthetic results, which are not always satisfactory. Objective Compare the transverse cervical incision with the classic incision in J or U. Methods This is a retrospective study of 47 patients who required cervical neck dissection between June 15, 2016 and June 15, 2017.A transversal incision was made in these surgeries, and their results were then compared with those of a group of 57 patients treated between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2012, in whose cases an incision in J or U was made. Results Regarding the incision type, complications were present in 4 (8.5 %) cases in the transversal incision group, and in 7 (12.2 %) patients of the group of traditional incisions in J or U, without statistical differences (p = 0.078). The only variables associated with complications of healing in the two groups was body mass index (BMI) < 18.5. The patients showed subjective satisfaction with the aesthetic result of the transverse incision, with an average of 7.51 vs 6.20 in the J or U incision. Conclusion The transverse incision represents a safe, aesthetic, and oncologically adequate option, associated with a lower cicatricial retraction rate, without significant complication rate and allowing adequate exposure of the surgical field, similar to the obtained with the classic incision in J or U.