Affiliation:
1. Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, King Saud University Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2. Department of Otolaryngology—Head and Neck Surgery, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Center, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
3. College of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
Abstract
Objectives: To compare the susceptibility and complication rates between flap and primary closures for tracheocutaneous fistula (TCF). Methods: We searched 4 online databases (Web of Science, Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Scopus) for relevant articles published from study inception until August 2022. Studies including at least 5 adult or child patients with persistent TCFs who underwent closure surgery via primary or flap repair were included. All included studies reported outcomes of surgical repairs such as successful closure rates and complications. In addition, we performed single-arm meta-analyses for each surgical method using the Open Meta-Analyst software to calculate the pooled event rate with a 95% confidence interval (CI); compared the 2 surgical procedures using the Review Manager software using the risk ratio with 95% CI; and assessed study quality based on the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute criteria. Results: Overall, 27 studies with 997 patients were included. No significant difference was observed between the closure success and major complication rates of surgical methods. The primary and flap closures had overall success rates of 0.979 and 0.98, respectively. The overall major complication rates in primary and flap closures were 0.034 and 0.021, respectively; and that of minor were 0.045 and 0.04, respectively. In primary closure, a significant decrease in the success rate with increasing age at the time of decannulation was observed. In addition, the risk of major complications increased with increasing time from decannulation to closure. Conclusions: Both the primary and flap repairs of TCF are effective based on closure success and complication rates; therefore, they are both acceptable therapeutic alternatives, and flap repair can be considered when other techniques have failed. However, further prospective randomized studies comparing these 2 procedures are needed to support our results.