Comparing donor site morbidity in osteocutaneous radial forearm versus fibula free flap for mandibular reconstruction.

PURPOSE: The osteocutaneous radial forearm free flap has gained popularity as a less morbid option for oromandibular reconstruction compared to the fibular free flap. However, there is a paucity of data regarding direct outcome comparison between these techniques. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of 94 patients who underwent maxillomandibular reconstruction intervened from July 2012-October 2020 at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences. All other bony free flaps were excluded. Endpoints retrieved encompassed demographics, surgical outcomes, perioperative data, and donor site morbidity. Continuous data points were analyzed using independent sample t-Tests. Qualitative data was analyzed using Chi-Square tests to determine significance. Ordinal variables were tested using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: The cohort was equally male and female, with a mean age of 62.6 years. There were 21 and 73 patients in the osteocutaneous radial forearm free flap and fibular free flap cohorts, respectively. Excluding age, the groups were otherwise comparable, including tobacco use, and ASA classification. Bony defect (OC-RFFF = 7.9 cm, FFF = 9.4 cm, p = 0.021) and skin paddle (OC-RFFF = 54.6 cm2, FFF = 72.21 cm2, p = 0.045) size were larger in the fibular free flap group. However, no significant difference was found between cohorts with respect to skin graft. There was no statistically significant difference between cohorts regarding the rate of donor site infection, tourniquet time, ischemia time, total operative time, blood transfusion, or length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: No significant difference in perioperative donor site morbidity was found between patients undergoing fibular forearm free flap and osteocutaneous radial forearm flap for maxillomandibular reconstruction. Osteocutaneous radial forearm flap performance was associated with significantly older age, which may represent a selection bias.

Impact of Oral Steroids on Tonsillectomy Postoperative Complications and Pain.

OBJECTIVES: To analyze the impact of steroids on postoperative tonsillectomy recovery and implement findings for improvement in postoperative management. METHODS: Institutional review board approved prospective study with retrospective analysis of private practice setting tonsillectomy patients (November 2015 to January 2017). A questionnaire was provided postoperatively to patients undergoing tonsillectomy with or without adenoidectomy. The study population was separated into 2 groups: patients who received steroids (3 days of either dexamethasone or prednisolone), postoperative steroid (POS), versus patients who did not receive steroids (PONS). RESULTS: The questionnaire had a return rate of 27.3% (254/931). Nine of the 254 responses were disqualified for lack of information; therefore, the total number of responses was 245. Of these, 115 were POS and 130 were PONS. The groups were similar in mean age (POS: 13.2 ± 10.4 years, PONS: 14.7 ± 12.1 years, P = .32) and sex (POS: Male 40.0%, PONS: Male 40.0%, P = .97). There was an overall decrease of pain and nausea/vomiting (N/V) in the steroid group (P = .0007). There was reduction in pain (P < .05) from postoperative day (POD) 2, 3, 4, and 6 in the POS group. Otherwise, there was no significant reduction in pain from POD 7 to 14, day-by-day rate of N/V, bleeding, or rate of emergency department (ED) or clinic visit (P > .05). CONCLUSION: Postoperative steroid reduced overall pain and N/V, as well as daily pain on POD 2, 3, 4, and 6. Pain from POD 7 to 14, rate of ED or clinic visit, or daily N/V and bleeding rate were not significantly different between cohorts.

Propranolol for Treatment of Infantile Hemangioma: Efficacy and Effect on Pediatric Growth and Development.

PURPOSE: Propranolol has been successful in treating problematic infantile hemangiomas (IH) but concerns regarding its effect on normal growth and development have been raised. This study examines physical growth, developmental milestones, and human growth hormone (hGH) levels in infants receiving propranolol for problematic IH. METHOD: Monthly heights and weights of children undergoing propranolol therapy for IH were prospectively collected and tabulated. Data analysis and comparison to World Health Organization (WHO) weight-for-age and weight-to-length z-scores was performed. Questionnaires regarding milestones, efficacy, and guardian satisfaction were performed, and a combination of both chart results and phone conducted surveys was tabulated. Serum from a small representative cohort of age-matched children with IH treated and not treated with propranolol was collected. RESULTS: A total of 185 children receiving propranolol therapy between 2008 and 2013 for IH were assigned to this study. The children were divided into two cohorts based on the presence of comorbidities or risk factors that may affect growth and development (n = 142 no comorbidities, n = 43 with comorbidities). Neither cohort demonstrated deviation from normal weight in comparison to WHO normative data. There was a significant deviation for BMI-for-age and weight-for-age z-scores in our population, especially in patients on propranolol for more than 7 months. Based on data from participants, via either completed questionnaires or chart results, most children met their developmental milestones at or before target ages, regardless of the presence of comorbidities. Eighty percent of guardians noticed clinical improvement of the IH, with 91% either happy about or neutral to using the medication. hGH levels were higher in patients receiving propranolol therapy, but not significantly different. CONCLUSION: Propranolol therapy is effective and well tolerated in the treatment of infantile hemangiomas. This study suggests that propranolol does not impair growth and has no impact on normal pediatric development.