Mandible Reconstruction in a Rural Population: Comparison of Radial Forearm and Free Fibula Flap Outcomes

Comparison of microsurgical reconstructive options after mandible resection is limited in the literature. Fibula free flaps (FFFs) can be costly and have timing limitations, but dental restoration can be performed, with varied reported rates of completion. The radial forearm free flap (RFFF) with mandible plating may be an alternative in select populations. The purpose of this study was to determine if the RFFF has similar outcomes to the FFF for mandible reconstruction in a rural population. A retrospective review of patients who underwent mandibulectomy from 2017 to 2021 at a single tertiary-care academic institution was performed. Those with FFF or RFFF reconstruction were included. Mandible defects were classified using the Jewer-Boyd H-C-L system. Sixty-eight patients were included with 53 undergoing FFF and 15 undergoing RFFF. Immediate reconstruction was significantly more common with RFFF than FFF (100% versus 64.2%; P =0.01). Lateral mandible defects were most common among both groups (52.9% FFF versus 73.3% RFFF; P =0.04). Osseous defect length was similar (9.5 cm FFF versus 7.7 cm RFFF; P =0.07), but soft tissue defect size was significantly larger in the RFFF group (28.6 cm 2 versus 15.3 cm 2 ; P =0.01). Complication rates (47.1% FFF versus 46.7% RFFF; P =0.98) and disease-free status at last follow-up (96.2% FFF versus 80.0% RFFF; P =0.06) were similar. Dental restoration occurred in 21.3% of patients undergoing FFF. Patients undergoing RFFF or FFF reconstruction after mandibulectomy had similar surgical and disease outcomes, with a low rate of completed dental restoration after FFF. Our findings suggest RFFF is a reasonable alternative to FFF for mandible reconstruction in select patients.