CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol 2021; 25(01): e27-e34
DOI: 10.1055/s-0039-3402439
Original Research

Functional Results of Transverse Extended Incision in Cervical Neck Dissection

1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
,
Jon Alexander Sistiaga-Suarez
1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
,
Izaskun Thomas-Arrizabalaga
1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
,
Jose Angel González-García
1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
,
Ekhiñe Larruscain
1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
,
Xabier Altuna
1  Department of Otorhinolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery, Hospital Universitario Donostia, País Vasco, Spain
› Author Affiliations

Abstract

Introduction Multiple incisions have been described for the surgical approach of cervical neck nodes. All of these descriptions are associated with better or worse exposure of the surgical field as well as with different functional and aesthetic results, which are not always satisfactory.

Objective Compare the transverse cervical incision with the classic incision in J or U.

Methods This is a retrospective study of 47 patients who required cervical neck dissection between June 15, 2016 and June 15, 2017.A transversal incision was made in these surgeries, and their results were then compared with those of a group of 57 patients treated between January 1, 2010 and January 1, 2012, in whose cases an incision in J or U was made.

Results Regarding the incision type, complications were present in 4 (8.5%) cases in the transversal incision group, and in 7 (12.2%) patients of the group of traditional incisions in J or U, without statistical differences (p = 0.078). The only variables associated with complications of healing in the two groups was body mass index (BMI) < 18.5. The patients showed subjective satisfaction with the aesthetic result of the transverse incision, with an average of 7.51 vs 6.20 in the J or U incision.

Conclusion The transverse incision represents a safe, aesthetic, and oncologically adequate option, associated with a lower cicatricial retraction rate, without significant complication rate and allowing adequate exposure of the surgical field, similar to the obtained with the classic incision in J or U.



Publication History

Received: 11 December 2018

Accepted: 30 October 2019

Publication Date:
24 April 2020 (online)

© 2020. Fundação Otorrinolaringologia. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Revinter Publicações Ltda.
Rua do Matoso 170, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, CEP 20270-135, Brazil