Aim: Although vascularized lymph node transplantation (VLNT) has gained recognition as an effective treatment option for lymphedema, no consensus on the timing of transplant with other lymphatic procedures has been established. The aim of this study is to describe our institutional experience with VLNT, including our staged approach and report postoperative outcomes.
Methods: A retrospective review of patients who underwent VLNT for upper extremity lymphedema from May 2017 to April 2022 was conducted. Patients were divided into fat- or fluid-dominant phenotypes based on preoperative workup. Patients with a minimum of 12-month follow-up were included. Records were reviewed for demographic, intraoperative, and surveillance data.
Results: Twenty-three patients underwent VLNT of the upper extremity during the study period, of which eighteen met the study criteria. Nine patients had fluid-dominant disease and nine patients had fat-dominant disease and had undergone prior debulking at our institution. Fluid-dominant patients demonstrated slight reductions in limb volume and hours in compression, and improvement in quality-of-life scores at twelve months. Fat-dominant patients who underwent prior debulking had a slight increase in limb volume without a change in hours of compression, and demonstrated improvements in quality-of-life scores in nearly all subdomains. Overall, 17% of patients discontinued compression therapy entirely. Improvement in extremity edema was present in 83% of postoperative MRIs.
Conclusion: VLNT had varying effects on limb measurements while reliably improving quality-of-life and allowing for the potential of discontinuing compression. Utilizing a staged approach wherein debulking is performed upfront may be particularly beneficial for patients with fat-dominant disease.
Free tissue transfer has become the gold standard for reconstruction within the head and neck. However, there are still many instances where pedicled locoregional flaps are the optimal reconstructive option. When myofascial tissue is needed, several options have been described throughout the literature. Various trapezius flaps have been used, although these have variable vascular anatomy and significant donor site morbidity. The pectoralis major myofascial flap has become a mainstay in head and neck reconstruction for its ease of harvest and reliability but suffers from similar issues with donor site morbidity. The pedicled latissimus dorsi flap (PLDF) is another reliable option that has been used for multiple different ablative sites within the head and neck. The thin, pliable structure of the latissimus dorsi makes it a viable option for many defects, and recent reports also support its feasibility for use in an interdisciplinary two-team approach. Furthermore, the donor site morbidity of the PLDF is minimal compared to other similar myofascial options. In this article, we describe the surgical considerations and operative techniques for PLDF transfer along with a review of its associated donor site morbidity.
Aim: Evaluate the clinical effectiveness of platelet-rich plasma as a treatment for lichen sclerosus.
Methods: A systematic review was performed. The electronic databases PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE®, Web of Science, Cochrane, clinicaltrials.gov were used to identify case studies, case series, prospective uncontrolled, and randomized controlled studies published between 1946 and April 21, 2021. Six prospective uncontrolled studies, one randomized double-blind prospective study, and one case report were included.
Results: Platelet-rich plasma treatment was subjectively reported to improve quality of life, but objective measures demonstrating treatment efficacy were not observed. In addition, platelet-rich plasma preparation and administration between studies lacked standardization.
Conclusion: Platelet-rich plasma may be used for symptomatic adjuvant treatment of lichen sclerosus, though additional double-blind controlled studies with standardized platelet-rich plasma protocols are needed to better characterize the efficacy of platelet-rich plasma.
Periodontal tissue engineering involves a multi-disciplinary approach towards the regeneration of periodontal ligament, cementum and alveolar bone surrounding teeth, whereas bone regeneration specifically applies to ridge reconstruction in preparation for future implant placement, sinus floor augmentation and regeneration of peri-implant osseous defects. Successful periodontal regeneration is based on verifiable cementogenesis on the root surface, oblique insertion of periodontal ligament fibers and formation of new and vital supporting bone. Ultimately, regenerated periodontal and peri-implant support must be able to interface with surrounding host tissues in an integrated manner, withstand biomechanical forces resulting from mastication, and restore normal function and structure. Current regenerative approaches utilized in everyday clinical practice are mainly guided tissue/bone regeneration-based. Although these approaches have shown positive outcomes for small and medium-sized defects, predictability of clinical outcomes is heavily dependent on the defect morphology and clinical case selection. In many cases, it is still challenging to achieve predictable regenerative outcomes utilizing current approaches. Periodontal tissue engineering and bone regeneration (PTEBR) aims to improve the state of patient care by promoting reconstitution of damaged and lost tissues through the use of growth factors and signaling molecules, scaffolds, cells and gene therapy. The present narrative review discusses key advancements in PTEBR including current and future trends in preclinical and clinical research, as well as the potential for clinical translatability.