𝔖 Bobbio Scriptorium
✦   LIBER   ✦

Maxillectomy and its classification

✍ Scribed by Ronald H. Spiro; Elliot W. Strong; Jatin P. Shah


Publisher
John Wiley and Sons
Year
1997
Tongue
English
Weight
277 KB
Volume
19
Category
Article
ISSN
1043-3074

No coin nor oath required. For personal study only.

✦ Synopsis


Background. Many adjectives are used to describe maxillectomy procedures, such as radical, total, extended, subtotal, medial, partial, and limited. The variety of nomenclature in our own Service database testifies that much confusion exists.

Methods. We have reviewed a 10-year experience with 403 maxillectomies performed between 1984 and 1993. Based on our retrospective reassessment, the operations were grouped into one of three categories. The term ''limited'' (LM) was applied to any maxillectomy which primarily removed one wall of the antrum. Designated ''subtotal'' (SM) was any procedure which removed at least two walls, including the palate. We listed as ''total'' (TM) only those who had a complete resection of the maxilla. Hospital charts were selectively reviewed, and each of the three types of maxillectomy was analyzed to determine the histology and site of the index cancers and the incidence of complex reconstruction.

Results. We determined that the maxillectomy performed in 230 patients (57%) was a LM. Tumor site and extent defined five different approaches in this cohort: peroral, 73; medial maxillectomy, 53; anterior craniofacial, 43; upper cheek flap, 42; and transfacial, 19. Subtotal maxillectomy or TM was performed in 135 and 38 (34% and 9%, respectively), almost 90% of whom had a cheek flap approach. Only 51 patients had an orbital exenteration, including 27 of the 38 (71%) of those who had a TM. Complex repair was employed in a total of 63 patients (16%), most often in those having TM (14 of 38, 37%).

Conclusions. Classification of maxillectomy either as LM, SM, or TM is useful and feasible. To define a LM, the portion of the maxilla removed (ie, palate, anterior wall, medial wall) must be specified. For any maxillectomy, the access used should be listed, and the surgeon should indicate whether the maxillectomy has been extended to include adjacent structures.


πŸ“œ SIMILAR VOLUMES


A modified classification for the maxill
✍ James S. Brown; Simon N. Rogers; Deborah N. McNally; Mark Boyle πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 2000 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 480 KB

Background. At present no widely accepted classification exists for the maxillectomy defect suitable for surgeons and prosthodontists. An acceptable classification that describes the defect and indicates the likely functional and aesthetic outcome is needed. Methods. The classification is made on t

Venous flapβ€”its classification and clini
✍ Dr. Akihiro Fukui; Yuji Inada; Masami Maeda; Shigeru Mizumoto; Hiroshi Yajima; S πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1994 πŸ› John Wiley and Sons 🌐 English βš– 797 KB

## Abstract We previously reported pedicled venous flap survival using the rat model, as well as venovenous, arteriovenous, and arterialized flow‐through venous flap survival using the rabbit ear model. For this study, we utilized these flaps clinically. Five of seven pedicled venous flaps survived

Prosthetic management of the maxillectom
✍ Harrison, Richard E. πŸ“‚ Article πŸ“… 1979 πŸ› Wiley (John Wiley & Sons) βš– 364 KB

## Abstract If maximal preservation of appearance and function are to be achieved for the maxillectomy patient, preoperative dental impressions should be obtained, and clear communication should be established between the surgeon and the prosthodontist. The immediate surgical splint, which can be u