Pedicled Flaps versus Free Flaps for Oral Cavity Cancer Reconstruction: A Comparison of Complications, Hospital Costs, and Functional Outcomes.

Introduction  Free flaps have been the preferred method for reconstruction after resection of oral cavity cancer. However, pedicled flaps remain valuable alternatives in appropriate settings. Objective  The main objective of the present study was to compare surgical complications, hospital costs, and functional outcomes of oral cavity cancer patients who underwent soft tissue reconstruction with pedicled flaps or free flaps. Methods  A total of 171 patients were included in the study. Ninety-eight underwent reconstruction with a pectoralis major, submental, temporalis, or supraclavicular pedicled flap, and in 73 patients, a radial forearm or anterolateral thigh free flap had been used. The cases were retrospectively reviewed, and a comparative analysis was carried out between the two groups. Results  Recipient site and flap complications, speech, and swallowing functions did not differ between groups, but donor site complications, operative time, hospital stay, and costs were significantly reduced in the pedicled flap group compared with the free flap group. However, the pectoralis major flap reconstruction resulted in a more inferior swallowing function than the free flap reconstruction. Conclusions  With comparable complications and functional outcomes, while decreasing in costs, pedicled flaps are a useful alternative to free flaps in oral cavity cancer reconstruction. However, in an extensive defect (> 70 cm 2 ), free flaps are the reconstruction of choice for the preservation of swallowing function.