METHODS: Patients undergoing either RFFF or UFFF were assessed with the University of Washington Quality of Life (UW-QOL) and Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14) questionnaires, and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), both before and at least 12 months post-reconstruction.
RESULTS: In total, 40 RFFF and 40 UFFF were included. Harvesting time was longer in RFFF (p = 0.043), and the donor-site defect was significantly larger in RFFF than in UFFF (p = 0.044). Patients with UFFF scored better UW-QOL in the appearance, pain, activity, mood, and social functioning domains (p < 0.05). However, the RFFF group excelled in swallowing and chewing domains. The DRS score revealed a significant difference between RFFF and UFFF, with scores of 36.26 versus 27.36, respectively. Moreover, the mean DRS score reduced at 12 months compared with 6 months, significantly superior for UFFF.
CONCLUSIONS: Oral cancer patients reconstructed with UFFF exhibited a better appearance, social domain, and mild decision regret compared with RFFF, indicating that the UFFF may contribute to improving postoperative quality of life in oral cancer patients.
方法:使用华盛顿大学生活质量(UW-QOL)和口腔健康影响概况(OHIP-14)问卷对接受RFFF或UFFF的患者进行评估,和决策后悔量表(DRS),重建前和重建后至少12个月。
结果:总计,包括40个RFFF和40个UFFF。RFFF的收获时间更长(p=0.043),RFFF的供体部位缺损明显大于UFFF(p=0.044)。UFFF患者在外观上获得更好的UW-QOL,疼痛,活动,心情,和社会功能域(p<0.05)。然而,RFFF小组在吞咽和咀嚼领域表现出色。DRS评分显示RFFF和UFFF之间存在显着差异,得分分别为36.26和27.36。此外,与6个月相比,12个月时的平均DRS评分降低,明显优于UFFF。
结论:用UFFF重建的口腔癌患者表现出更好的外观,社会领域,与RFFF相比,轻微的决策后悔,表明UFFF可能有助于改善口腔癌患者的术后生活质量。