The versatility of the scapular free flap: A workhorse flap? A systematic review and meta‐analysis

• Published in: Microsurgery Vol. 44; no. 5; pp. e31203 - n/a
• Main Authors: Escobar‐Domingo, Maria J., Bustos, Valeria P., Akintayo, Rachel, Mahmoud, Amir‐Ala, Fanning, James E., Foppiani, Jose A., Miller, Amitai S., Cauley, Ryan P., Lin, Samuel J., Lee, Bernard T.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Hoboken, USA John Wiley & Sons, Inc 01-07-2024; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: Bone grafts; Bone surgery; Defects; Failure rates; Free Tissue Flaps - blood supply; Free Tissue Flaps - transplantation; Graft Survival; Head and neck; Hematoma; Heterogeneity; Humans; Literature reviews; Malignancy; Meta-analysis; Neck; Plastic surgery; Plastic Surgery Procedures - methods; Postoperative Complications - epidemiology; Reconstructive surgery; Scapula - transplantation; Surgery; Versatility
• ISSN: 0738-1085; 1098-2752; 1098-2752
• DOI: 10.1002/micr.31203

Background
The scapular free flap (SFF) is essential in complex reconstructive surgery and often indicated in complex defects with compromised or poor local tissue integrity. This review aims to assess the versatility and reliability of the SFF during reconstruction.
Methods
A comprehensive literature review of multiple databases was conducted following the PRISMA guidelines. An analysis of pooled data was performed to evaluate flap failure rate for any anatomical unit using SFF as the primary endpoints. Secondary endpoints included other complication rates after reconstruction such as partial flap loss, revision surgery, fistula, hematoma, and infection.
Results
A total of 110 articles were included, with 1447 pooled flaps. The main recipient site was the head and neck region (89.0%). Major indications for reconstruction were malignancy (55.3%), burns (19.2%), and trauma (9.3%). The most common types of flaps were osteocutaneous (23.3%), cutaneous (22.6%), and chimeric (18.0%). The pooled flap failure rate was 2% (95%CI: 1%–4%). No significant heterogeneity was present across studies (Q statistic 20.2, p = .69; I2 .00%, p = .685). Nonscapular supplementary flaps and grafts were required in 61 cases. The average length and surface area of bone flaps were 7.2 cm and 24.8cm2, respectively. The average skin paddle area was 134.2cm2.
Conclusion
The SFF is a useful adjunct in the reconstructive surgeon's armamentarium as evidence by its intrinsic versatility and diverse clinical indications. Our data suggest a low failure rate in multicomponent defect reconstruction, especially in head and neck surgery. SFFs enable incorporation of multiple tissue types and customizable dimensions—both for vascularized bone and cutaneous skin—augmenting its value in the microsurgeon's repertoire as a chimeric flap. Further research is necessary to overcome the conventional barriers to SFF utilization and to better comprehend the specific scenarios in which the SFF can serve as the preferred alternative workhorse flap.