
==== Front
Clin Oral Investig
Clin Oral Investig
Clinical Oral Investigations
1432-6981
1436-3771
Springer Berlin Heidelberg Berlin/Heidelberg

39182195
5885
10.1007/s00784-024-05885-y
Research
Comparative analysis of volumetric changes between resection volume of oral tongue cancer and post operative volume of radial forearm flaps
Zirk Matthias matthias_zirk@yahoo.de

123
Niknazemi Mina 12
Riekert Maximilian 12
Kreppel Matthias 12
Linz Christian 12
Lentzen Max-Philipp 12
1 https://ror.org/00rcxh774 grid.6190.e 0000 0000 8580 3777 Department for Oral and Craniomaxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
2 https://ror.org/00rcxh774 grid.6190.e 0000 0000 8580 3777 Medical Faculty, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany
3 Oral and Craniomaxillofacial and Plastic Surgery, MKG Köln West, Bunzlauerstr. 1, 50858 Cologne, Germany
25 8 2024
25 8 2024
2024
28 9 4983 1 2024
13 8 2024
© The Author(s) 2024
2024
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Objectives

This study investigates the relationship between the total volume of oral tongue cancer pre-operatively and the RFFF volume post-operatively.

Materials and methods

A total of 52 DICOM imaging datasets (CT or MRI) of 26 patients were included in this study. The volume of the desired structure was quantified using semi-automatic segmentation using the software ITK-SNAP. All extracted measurements were validated by two further clinicians at separate instances.

Results

The variation of MeanVolTu can be predicted by MeanVolFlap moderately reliable with 59.1% confidence (R-Qua: 0.591). ANOVA Testing to represent how well the regression line fits the data, resulted in the overall regression model being statistically significant in predicting the MeanVolTu (p < 0.001). The flap volume may be predicted using the following algorithm: MeanVolFlap0 = 3241,633 + 1, 322 * MeanVolTu.

Conclusion

The results of this study show positive correlation between tumor volume and flap volume, highlighting the significance of efficient flap planning with increasing tumor volume. A larger extraction volume of the radial forearm free flap from the donor site compromises the forearm more, thus increasing the probability of post-operative complications.

Clinical relevance

Radial forearm free flap design in accordance with its corresponding 3D tumor volume.

Keywords

Oral tongue cancer
Radial forearm free flap
Squamous cell carcinoma
Computed tomography
Magnetic resonance imaging
Depth of invasion
Ulnar forearm free flap
Volumetric measurements
ITK-SNAP
Universitätsklinikum Köln (8977)Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

issue-copyright-statement© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2024
==== Body
pmcIntroduction

The tongue muscle fulfils crucial roles within the human body, which can be divided into motor and sensory functions. The motor functions include grasping, grinding, and passing of the food bolus during mastication, as well as speech and language. Specialized tastebuds located within the surface mucosa of the tongue, allow the sensory function of tasting. Furthermore, the tonsilla linguae act as a barrier to pathogens entering through the oral cavity [1].

Over the past decades confirmed cases of oral cancer have continuously increased, currently accounting for a worldwide yearly incidence of 200.000–350.000 [2, 3]. With a total share of 30%, tongue cancer presents itself as the most common malignant cancer of the oral cavity [4, 5].

Once TNM Staging has been conducted by the tumor board, a treatment plan is designed which may consist of a given combination of surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. The choice of treatment will depend on the TNM stage and location of the cancer, as well as the overall health of the patient [6].

The main aim of the treatment is to achieve local control of the tumor with as little functional or esthetic impairment as possible. The primary goal in free flap reconstruction of the tongue is to preserve the mobility of the organ and to maintain its muscle function. By replacing resected parts of the tongue using innervated vital muscle flaps (infrahyoid pedicled muscle flap), the function is maximized [7].

Surgical resection of the tumor with negative margins is an essential strategy for the curative treatment of SCC of the tongue. A resection with negative margins consists of the complete excision of the primary tumor with no residual cancer cells left behind [8–10].

If the resulting tongue defect that occurs after surgery cannot be healed secondarily, a reconstruction can be performed using regional or free flaps. The chosen reconstruction method and the origin of the flap depend on various factors including the size of the defect, the exact location, which tissues are being replaced by the flap and the policy of the respective institution [11]. The RFFF is the most used microvascular flap when the restoration of tongue mobility is the primary goal of the reconstruction [12, 13]. Whilst numerous donor site characteristics must be considered, such as possible function loss in the arm including pinching and gripping strength or subsequent skin graft coverage, the RFFF still outclasses other free flap options in terms of functionality [13, 14].

Due to the well-known phenomenon of post-operative free flap shrinkage, a slightly larger volume is extracted from the donor site to compensate this decrease in volume [16–18]. There may be multiple factors influencing the volume of a free flap, such as adjuvant radiotherapy [18–20], muscle atrophy (for muscular flaps) due to denervation [21], transitional ischemic effects [22, 23], as well as edema, hematoma and inflammation after surgery [24, 25]. Further to this the quality of recipient vessels as well as the choice of vessels may further influence the amount of flap shrinkage [26].

At present there is no scientific literature that investigates the correlation of pre-operative tumor volume and post-operative flap volume of SCC of the tongue. A suitable surgical plan in the treatment of oral tongue cancer should include an accurate interdisciplinary staging, a well-structured strategy to cover defects after tumor resection successfully as well as proper consideration of the donor site. The efficiency and success of a treatment program may vastly benefit from accurate planning that can predict extraction volumes, thus decreasing donor site complications and improving the patient care provided. The aim of this retrospective pilot study was to conduct a comparative analysis between resected oral tongue cancer volume and post-operative volume of the radial forearm free flap to aid surgical flap planning and improve patient care.

Materials and methods

Within this retrospective pilot study, a total of 52 DICOM imaging datasets of 26 patients (7 females, 19 males) of the University clinic of Cologne were identified, which met the criteria to be included in this study. All patients, who had been issued a diagnosis of oral tongue cancer (ICD10: C01, C02, C04, C06, C14) from 01.01.2009–01.06.2021, were considered for this study. Further descriptions of ICD10 classifications which described cancerous lesions in areas other than the corpus of the tongue (for instance cancer of the floor of the mouth), were used for exclusion of the data. The analysis of patient records and surgical reports of the remaining 105 patients lead to a total sample of 70 patients, who received an RFFF after tumor resection. Using the medical imaging Software of the University clinic of Cologne (ImpaxEE) the remaining datasets were filtered according to pre- as well as post-surgical (MRI or CT) clinical diagnostics performed within the radiology department of the University clinic of Cologne. 42 patients in total had both their pre- and post-surgical images available on the system, of which 16 further datasets had to be excluded from this study due to imaging artefacts, post operative complications (fistulas, hematoma) or flap failure leading to premature removal of the flap, thus providing a data pool of 26 datasets in total. The T-classification of the included candidates is constituted of T1 (n = 10) and T2 (n = 16) cases.

Within ITK-SNAP [27] the sagittal, coronal, and axial slices were merged, and a three-dimensional image obtained. MRI and CT images were acquired with voxels of equal size in each plane (isotropic spatial resolution). Using semi-automatic segmentation of the pre-surgical images, the tumor was then identified and volumetric calculation in cubic millimeters carried out by ITK-SNAP. To decrease error within the measurements, each semi-automatic segmentation was carried out 3 times on the same imaging set in a standardized manner by repeating each measurement at three independent instances. Leaving sufficient time between the measurements aids the evaluation of the same imaging data set with a fresh mind rather than their fabrication due to remembrance of repeating structures.

The mean values of the datasets were then used for further statistical analysis. This method was adapted for each patient using semi-automatic segmentation of post-surgical images, thus identifying the volume of the RFFF. All imaging dataset measurements were validated by two further maxillo-facial surgeons on separate instances (minimum of 48 h between each measurement).

The datasets were summarized initially using Excel spreadsheets and analyzed statistically using the Program IBM SPSS Statistics for MAC (IBM SPSS Statistics for MAC, version 28.0.1.1.(14); IBM, Armonk, NY). Categorial variables were investigated in terms of frequency and mode. The Mann-Whitney-U-Test for independent samples was used to determine distribution patterns within age and gender. Further analysis included the calculation of mean, median, standard deviation and percentiles for numerical variables including tumor volume and flap volume. The data was analyzed for normal or abnormal distribution patterns, whereby the tests showed the presence of one outlier value for tumor volume. After considering the plausibility of the increased tumor volume value and considering it’s dependency on the extent of disease within the patient, the outlier was included in the data. This led to the data being abnormally distributed and conducting the Spearmen correlation test for rejecting or accepting the null hypothesis. The Friedman test was used to ensure accuracy of the repeated measurements for Tumor Volume and Flap Volume. Regressions tests were carried out to investigate correlations between abnormally distributed variable values. Statistical variations were considered significant if their occurrence could be reasoned by a minimum of 95% due to a factor other than chance, thus resulting in p < 0,05.

Relevant pre- and post-surgical imaging series were selected, and their corresponding DICOM data sets anonymously exported from ImpaxEE and imported into the open-source software ITK-SNAP (Penn Image Computing and Science Laboratory). All personalized data was removed from the imaging datasets, providing fully anonymized images for volumetric quantification.

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Cologne (No 23-1444-retro). All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Results

The subjects age ranged between 32 and 84 years. The resulting mean age was 64 (± 14,9 SD). 19 subjects (73,1%) were male, whilst 7 subjects (26,9%) were female, this displaying a strong trend towards male subjects. The distribution of age according to gender is illustrated within a side-by-side boxplot in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1 Age distribution of male and female subjects

To elaborate whether the age distribution of male and female showed any statistically significant differences, the Mann-Whitney-U Test for independent samples was used. Considering the null hypothesis as age distribution being the same for both female and male gender, the results of this analysis reject the null hypothesis (p = 0,015). Thus, the study presented a male gender dominance.

Figure 2 displays an overview of the time between the scans of the pre-operative tumor and the post-operative flap. A total of 16 subjects received their postoperative scan within 6–12 months after their preoperative scan being taken. This accounts for over 60% of the total patients within this study.

Fig. 2 Time between pre-operative scan of tumor and post-operative scan of flap in months (M)

The pre-operative imaging data on ImpaxEE for each patient was analyzed in different planes. The sections which provided most visible margins of the tumor were exported as DICOM images and uploaded onto ITK-SNAP. Using semi-automatic segmentation, the original tumor Volume prior to resection was calculated by the program. The measurements were repeated three times with at least 24 h between each measurement of the same dataset. The validation of these results was conducted by two further clinicians at independent variables.

The editorial view of a pre-operative imaging dataset in differing planes: 1- transversal, 2- sagittal, 3- frontal on ITK-SNAP, is illustrated below in Fig. 3 [28].

Fig. 3 Editorial view of a pre-operative imaging dataset on ITK-SNAP. Each window represents another plane: 1- transversal, 2- sagittal, 3- frontal [28]

After marking the tumor mass in all planes using semi-automatic segmentation, the total volume of the cancer prior to the operation was calculated using the “Volumes and Statistics” toolbar within the program. Using the “active contouring” tool, the tumor mass was extracted from the surrounding structures and displayed in isolation. Within this viewing modus the mass can be observed from different angles by moving the image around inside the application. Once all tumor volumes prior to the operation of all 26 patients were determined, the values for minimum, maximum, mean Volume, Variance and SD (Standard deviation) were calculated as displayed below in Table 1.

Table 1 Summary of results for tumor volumes (in mm³) prior to operation

	VolTumor1	Voltumor2	VolTumor3	MeanVolTu	
Mean	4347,96	4551,42	4606,62	4502,0008	
Median	3587,50	3452,50	3875,00	3716,8350	
Standard Deviation	2572,668	2932,010	2829,595	2743,78291	
Minimum	1496	1208	1742	1527,00	
Maximum	13,250	14,220	15,050	14173,33	

The standard deviation (SD) and Variance was also determined. As a result of this, the mean tumor volume was found to create a mass of 4502,00 (± 2743,78 SD) mm³.

In an analogue manner, the volume for flap was identified. Once all RFFF volumes after the operation of all 26 patients were determined, the mean Volume was calculated.

Table 2 Summary of results for RFFF volumes (in mm³) after the operation

	VolFlap1	VolFlap2	VolFlap3	MeanVolFlap	
Mean	9200,31	9162,42	9214,46	9192,3981	
Median	8701,00	8700,50	8953,00	8735,1700	
Standard Deviation	4823,667	4823,945	4635,198	4716,16564	
Minimum	3086	4359	3660	3701,67	
Maximum	23,110	24,720	24,110	23980,00	

The above shown Table 2 summarizes the minimum, maximum and mean flap volumes. The standard deviation (SD) and Variance was also determined. As a result of this, the mean flap volume was found to create a mass of 9192,40 (± 4716,17 SD) mm³.

The Friedman test was used to elaborate whether using a mean value of VolTumor1, VolTumor2 and VolTumor3 can be considered as accurate. There are no significant differences in mean volumes of VolTumor1, VolTumor2 and VolTumor3 (p = 0,341). The same method was used to elaborate whether using a mean value of VolFlap1, VolFlap2 and VolFlap3 can be considered as accurate. There are no significant differences in mean volumes of VolFlap1, VolFlap2 and VolFlap3 (p = 0,962). In summary, the mean volume for tumor and the mean volume for flap may be used for correlation and regression testing. Via SPSS the correlation of 0,769 (p < 0.001) shows a highly positive correlation between MeanVolTu and MeanVolFlap. Thus, MeanVolTu increases when MeanVolFlap increases. To examine whether flap volume can be predicted by tumor volume, a regression test for abnormally distributed data was carried out. Considering the mean volumes for both variables, regression testing was conducted via SPSS for MeanVolFlap as the dependent variable and MeanVolTu as the independent variable. The variation of MeanVolTu can be predicted by MeanVolFlap moderately reliable with 59.1% confidence (R-Qua: 0.591). ANOVA Testing to represent how well the regression line fits the data, resulted in the overall regression model being statistically significant in predicting the MeanVolTu (p < 0.001). The coefficient values within the regression tests allow the prediction of a regression model, predicting the flap volume using the tumor volume. Thus, the flap volume (MeanFlapVol0) may be predicted using the following algorithm:

\documentclass[12pt]{minimal} \usepackage{amsmath} \usepackage{wasysym} \usepackage{amsfonts} \usepackage{amssymb} \usepackage{amsbsy} \usepackage{mathrsfs} \usepackage{upgreek} \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{-69pt} \begin{document}$${\bf{MeanVolFlap0}}{\rm{ }} = {\rm{ }}{\bf{3241}},{\bf{633}}\, + \,{\bf{1}},{\rm{ }}{\bf{322}}\,*\,{\bf{MeanVolTu}}$$\end{document}

The below shown Fig. 4 summarizes Snapshots of segmentation images for a 3-Dimensional illustration of 1 - an RFFF, 2 – a tumor, 3 & 4 – different angles of the same RFFF [28].

Fig. 4 Snapshots of segmentation images: 1- RFFF, 2 – tumor, 3 & 4 – different angles of the same RFFF [28]

Discussion

Within this retrospective pilot study, a total of 26 imaging datasets of preoperative tumor volume and the corresponding postoperative flap volume were analyzed. The CT or MRI datasets were measured out at three separate instances, increasing the reliability of these results. The volumetric measurements were validated by two further maxillo-facial surgeons independently. Using semi-automatic segmentation on ITK-SNAP, the required structures were identified, and their volumes calculated. Semi-automatic segmentation has proven to be a reproducible and accurate quantification method for tumor volume [27]. Whilst tumor volume quantification using semi-automatic segmentation on ITK-SNAP has not yet been utilized for tumor and flap quantification in oral tongue cancer, the method has been successfully conducted on hard and soft tissue by various authors including the calculation of volumes of retrobulbar hematoma [29], medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ) lesions [30] and 4D flow MRI angiographic data for the assessment of carotid bulb hemodynamics [31]. Whilst border measurements of structures on imaging data within ITK-SNAP may be subject to slight variances depending on the individual evaluating them, the use of semi-automatic segmentation increases the reproducibility of this method [28]. The semi-automatic nature of this technique allows for computerized errors due to for instance artefacts to be corrected and combine the best of manual and automatic segmentation. In a clinical study by Gau et al., the authors found that semi-automatic segmentation provided the highest accuracy in resected brain areas with a moderate amount of human input, compared to manual and fully automatic segmentation on ITK-SNAP [32].

To allow more powerful and accurate conclusions the sample size was increased by repeating each measurement at three independent instances. Leaving sufficient time between the measurements aids the evaluation of the same imaging data set with an indifferent view rather than fabrication due to remembrance of repeating structures. Further studies carried out within this field of research would greatly benefit from the involvement of a specialized radiologist for the determination of initial tumor volume. To improve comparability, a standard layer should be selected to avoid discrepancies in findings due to the use of different axes in measurements.

The individual values for volume of the tumor are dependent on various factors, such as the progression of the tumor in the measurable terms of the T-stage of the TNM-Classification, age, gender and many more [11, 33, 34]. Similarly, the volume of each flap is dependent on its initial tumor volume with a positive correlation displayed in the results of this study. For this reasoning the individual cases are compared by analyzing their correlation rather than the individual numeric values. Factors influencing this correlation may include the progression rate of the individual disease, the time passing between pre-operative imaging and operation for tumor volume and the time between the operation and post-operative imaging for flap volume [34]. Also worth mentioning are the variances between the time passing from the operation and post-operative imaging for individual cases. Due to differing patient circumstances and scheduling of the appointment in the appropriate department depending on their adherence, this waiting time may be prolonged. A prolonged waiting time between the operation and the post-operative aftercare imaging, may lead to a decreased flap volume due to flap shrinking [25, 35].

A further aspect of significant clinical importance entails the concept of shared decision making, which originally pioneered within the field of breast reconstructive surgery. Previous studies have shown that the utilization of decision aids lead to an enhancement in decision quality, a decrease in decisional conflict and increased patient satisfaction [36, 37].

Personal aesthetic preferences of patients are greatly influenced by their viewpoint on donor site scars and may impact their overall experience with reconstructive surgery [38].

The tumor volume from each pathological report for the resected tumor could not be used as a comparative variable, due to the R0 resection of the tumor. This means that the surgical margins must be in microscopically tumor-free tissue. As a result of this, the resected mass is greater in its volume than the mere tumor mass so that the pathological volume differentiates itself from the calculated tumor volume from the imaging data. Incorporating these surgical safety margins, thus account for uncertainties in predicting final resection size. On the contrary, irregular flap contractions cause inconsistencies in the opposite direction with irregularly decreasing flap volumes compared to pathologically resected mass volumes. Individual variations in the healing processes as well as Oedema may cause a natural shrinking process of flaps used in reconstructive surgery. For the outlined reasoning the volumes from the pathological reports were excluded from this study.

We have provided an overview of the time between preoperative imaging of the tumor and postoperative imaging of the flap in months, to increase clinical significance. Since the follow-up time influences the volume loss of the flap, an improvement for future study designs suggests a constant imaging protocol. The retrospective nature of this feasibility study focused on the plausibility of this topic. In addition to this, any adjuvant radiotherapy in advanced oral tongue cancer leads to further volume reduction of the flap itself but also surrounding tissues [18–20]. Kim et al. investigated the effect of several variables, including post-operative radiation, on flap volume. The results of this study showed there is no statistically significant change in flap volume between 3 months and 3 years. Since all post operative imaging was taken within 3 months and 3 years for the patients within this study, the radiation data was not considered further [39].

With excellent results within the recipient site of the RFFF over the past decades [40], the importance of good closure of the primary defect of the donor site in terms of functionality and esthetics increases [41]. Most commonly, the primary defect may be covered using a split-thickness skin graft (STSG). Defect coverage with skin grafts in major operations may show a failure rate of up to 28% and are associated with complications such as extended healing times, exposed flexor tendons, or further surgery on the donor site [42, 43]. Doubtlessly, more precise flap size predictions can aid minimize the volume of donor site flap extraction and decrease donor site morbidity. In terms of implications on donor site functionality and esthetics, the need for further research within this area is therefore justifiable [41].

Volumetric reductions of flaps are prevalent up to three years post reconstruction [44], affecting esthetic and functional outcomes. Although free flap reconstruction in head and neck cancer surgery follows a standardized surgical approach, there is no consensus procedure on estimation of flap volumes [45].

Since there are no previous studies on the comparison of volumes between preoperative tumor of the tongue and postoperative RFFF, no direct comparisons to other research can be drawn. However, past literature on both the topic of volumetric measurements using ITK-SNAP as well as RFFF coverage after oral tongue cancer will be discussed in the following section to provide an overview of the research currently available within this field.

Bozec et al. found that reconstruction with RFFF and radical ablative surgery provide promising oncologic and functional results in patients with oral cancer. Three out of 132 patients within this study suffered from RFFF failures. [33].

A more recent study by Xu et al. compares data from five studies comparing donor-site outcomes of RFFF and UFFF. This analysis showed a significantly lower incidence of complications at the donor site of UFFF than that in RFFF. They suggest the UFFF may be an ideal substitute for RFFF in reconstructive surgery; however, large-scale studies with long-term follow up are necessary to confirm these findings [46].

Regarding volumetric quantifications with ITK-SNAP, several authors have successfully conducted research on various structures using semi-automatic segmentation.

Zirk et al. conducted a retrospective study, analyzing differences in volumes of areas of osteolysis caused by medication-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (MRONJ). They found that the most frequently affected localization is the mandible, with female subjects showing significantly more lesions within the maxilla. Their volumetric measurements using ITK-SNAP revealed a greater absolute osteolysis volume in male subjects [47].

Another study by Ritschl et al. looked at bone volume behavior of free fibula and iliac crest flaps using ITK-SNAP. 113 cases in total were analyzed and showed a stability, whilst iliac crest flaps showed a higher bone volume reduction. Several factors contributed significantly to bone volume behavior including the time interval between operation and CT scan, age, gender, reconstruction with the flap, and the number of fibula segments [34].

A more recent study by Younes et al. compared flap shrinkage between the RFFF and the ALTF (anterolateral thigh free flap). Whilst flap shrinkage was shown for both flaps, the RFFF showed a significantly higher percentage shrinkage than the ALTF. The authors suggest that in hemiglossectomy cases, the ALTF is made 1.4 times larger than the defect, while the RFFF is made 1.5 times larger than the defect [48].

Doubtlessly a larger tumor volume resection will lead to a larger flap volume, thus leaving a larger defect at the donor site. Limitations of volumetric predictions using 3-Dimensional images include an increased distortion rate of soft tissue and discrepancies between estimated resection margins using radiographic information and actual resection margins intraoperatively. Since resection for R0 needs to be performed in cancer-free tissue, these volumes tend to be larger than initially anticipated. Further volume changing effects include surgical complications such as edema or the priorization of functional and anatomical characteristics. These include rebuilding anatomical conjunctions such as the floor of the mouth, or reconstruction of tongue movement by prioritizing the repair of the length of the tongue. Overcoming these limitations may lead to more accurate definitions of tumor margins preoperatively and could aid in predicting the anticipated flap volume more precisely. This would allow for smaller extraction volumes from the donor site and lead to decreased donor site morbidity, as well as higher patient satisfaction.

Conclusion

In summary, the extracted data shows a significant positive correlation between preoperative tumor volume and postoperative flap volume (p = 0,769 (p < 0.001)). Nonetheless, implications within this study include the absence of other studies as direct comparisons, as well as the lack of bigger amounts of data leading to a small sample size. Due to the small sample size within this study, a reproducible numeric constant can’t be directly deducted to describe a relationship between pre-operative tumor volume and required flap size. A larger sample size may increase the reliability of statistical relationships and allow more accurate estimations on flap volume based on primary tumor volume. A positive correlation between tumor Volume and flap volume highlights the importance of efficient flap planning with increasing tumor volume. A larger extraction volume of the radial forearm free flap from the donor site, compromises the forearm more and results in higher rates of donor site morbidity. This implication highlights the clinical relevance of this investigation and justifies the cause for further clinical studies to be carried out within this area of research.

Author contributions

MZ and ML responsible for conceptualization, validation, investigation, writing of the original draft, and editing of the manuscript. MZ and ML were supported by MN for data investigation and validation. MZ, ML and MN were responsible for validation, investigation, resources, and editing of the manuscript. MR, MK commented on the manuscript. CL was responsible for supervision of the project. No funding was acquired.

Funding

The authors declare that no funds, grants, or other support were received during the preparation of this manuscript.

Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL.

Data availability

No datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.

Declarations

Ethical approval

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University Hospital Cologne (No 23-1444-retro). All procedures performed in the study were in accordance with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
==== Refs
References

1. Aumüller G, Aust G, Conrad A (2006) Duale Reihe Anatomie. Duale Reihe Anatomie. Vol. 1. Auflage Thieme
2. La Vecchia C Epidemiology and prevention of oral cancer Oral Oncol 1997 33 5 302 312 10.1016/S1368-8375(97)00029-8 9415327
La Vecchia C et al (1997) Epidemiology and prevention of oral cancer. Oral Oncol 33(5):302–3129415327
3. Figuero Ruiz E Effects of the consumption of alcohol in the oral cavity: relationship with oral cancer Med Oral 2004 9 1 14 23 14704613
Figuero Ruiz E et al (2004) Effects of the consumption of alcohol in the oral cavity: relationship with oral cancer. Med Oral 9(1):14–2314704613
4. Krishnatreya M Characteristics of oral tongue and base of the tongue cancer: a hospital cancer registry based analysis Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015 16 4 1371 1374 10.7314/APJCP.2015.16.4.1371 25743801
Krishnatreya M et al (2015) Characteristics of oral tongue and base of the tongue cancer: a hospital cancer registry based analysis. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 16(4):1371–137425743801
5. Tota JE Rising incidence of oral tongue cancer among white men and women in the United States, 1973–2012 Oral Oncol 2017 67 146 152 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2017.02.019 28351569
Tota JE et al (2017) Rising incidence of oral tongue cancer among white men and women in the United States, 1973–2012. Oral Oncol 67:146–15228351569
6. Iype EM The role of selective neck dissection (I-III) in the treatment of node negative (N0) neck in oral cancer Oral Oncol 2008 44 12 1134 1138 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2008.02.017 18486527
Iype EM et al (2008) The role of selective neck dissection (I-III) in the treatment of node negative (N0) neck in oral cancer. Oral Oncol 44(12):1134–113818486527
7. Deganello A Leemans CR The infrahyoid flap: a comprehensive review of an often overlooked reconstructive method Oral Oncol 2014 50 8 704 710 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2014.04.011 24856306
Deganello A, Leemans CR (2014) The infrahyoid flap: a comprehensive review of an often overlooked reconstructive method. Oral Oncol 50(8):704–71024856306
8. Baas M A systematic review on the sensory reinnervation of free flaps for tongue reconstruction: does improved sensibility imply functional benefits? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015 68 8 1025 1035 10.1016/j.bjps.2015.04.020 26044088
Baas M et al (2015) A systematic review on the sensory reinnervation of free flaps for tongue reconstruction: does improved sensibility imply functional benefits? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 68(8):1025–103526044088
9. Ganly I Patel S Shah J Early stage squamous cell cancer of the oral tongue–clinicopathologic features affecting outcome Cancer 2012 118 1 101 111 10.1002/cncr.26229 21717431
Ganly I, Patel S, Shah J (2012) Early stage squamous cell cancer of the oral tongue–clinicopathologic features affecting outcome. Cancer 118(1):101–11121717431
10. Sutton DN The prognostic implications of the surgical margin in oral squamous cell carcinoma Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2003 32 1 30 34 10.1054/ijom.2002.0313 12653229
Sutton DN et al (2003) The prognostic implications of the surgical margin in oral squamous cell carcinoma. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 32(1):30–3412653229
11. Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft D. K. and AWMF (2019) Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie, in S3-Leitlinie Diagnostik und Therapie des Mundhöhlenkarzinoms, Langversion 01 (Konsultationsfassung), 2019, AWMF
12. Benanti E Objective selection criteria between ALT and Radial Forearm flap in oral soft tissues Reconstruction Indian J Plast Surg 2019 52 2 166 170 10.1055/s-0039-1693504 31602131
Benanti E et al (2019) Objective selection criteria between ALT and Radial Forearm flap in oral soft tissues Reconstruction. Indian J Plast Surg 52(2):166–17031602131
13. de Vicente JC Microvascular free tissue transfer for tongue reconstruction after hemiglossectomy: a functional assessment of radial forearm versus anterolateral thigh flap J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2008 66 11 2270 2275 10.1016/j.joms.2008.01.018 18940491
de Vicente JC et al (2008) Microvascular free tissue transfer for tongue reconstruction after hemiglossectomy: a functional assessment of radial forearm versus anterolateral thigh flap. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 66(11):2270–227518940491
14. Cai YC Comparative Analysis of Radial Forearm Free Flap and Anterolateral Thigh Flap in Tongue Reconstruction after Radical Resection of Tongue Cancer ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 2019 81 5–6 252 264 10.1159/000502151 31533123
Cai YC et al (2019) Comparative Analysis of Radial Forearm Free Flap and Anterolateral Thigh Flap in Tongue Reconstruction after Radical Resection of Tongue Cancer. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec 81(5–6):252–26431533123
15. Sarukawa S Volumetric changes in the transferred flap after Anterior Craniofacial Reconstruction J Reconstr Microsurg 2006 22 07 499 505 10.1055/s-2006-951313 17048130
Sarukawa S et al (2006) Volumetric changes in the transferred flap after Anterior Craniofacial Reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 22(07):499–50517048130
16. Higgins KM Volumetric changes of the anterolateral thigh free flap following adjuvant radiotherapy in total parotidectomy reconstruction Laryngoscope 2012 122 4 767 772 10.1002/lary.22509 22294314
Higgins KM et al (2012) Volumetric changes of the anterolateral thigh free flap following adjuvant radiotherapy in total parotidectomy reconstruction. Laryngoscope 122(4):767–77222294314
17. Kamizono KI Volumetric changes of transferred free anterolateral thigh flaps in head and neck lesions Auris Nasus Larynx 2021 48 4 751 757 10.1016/j.anl.2020.12.006 33461854
Kamizono KI et al (2021) Volumetric changes of transferred free anterolateral thigh flaps in head and neck lesions. Auris Nasus Larynx 48(4):751–75733461854
18. Choi S et al (2004) Radiation Therapy does not Impact Local Complication Rates after Free Flap Reconstruction for Head and Neck Cancer, vol 130. Archives of Otolaryngology–Head & Neck Surgery, pp 1308–1312. 11
19. Hohlweg-Majert B Impact of radiotherapy on microsurgical reconstruction of the head and neck J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2012 138 11 1799 1811 10.1007/s00432-012-1263-6 22714589
Hohlweg-Majert B et al (2012) Impact of radiotherapy on microsurgical reconstruction of the head and neck. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 138(11):1799–181122714589
20. Mücke T Influence of irradiation and oncologic surgery on head and neck microsurgical reconstructions Oral Oncol 2012 48 4 367 371 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2011.11.013 22155256
Mücke T et al (2012) Influence of irradiation and oncologic surgery on head and neck microsurgical reconstructions. Oral Oncol 48(4):367–37122155256
21. Song KH Volumetric change of the latissimus dorsi muscle after postoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy in immediate breast reconstruction with an extended latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap: final results from serial studies Arch Plast Surg 2021 48 6 607 613 10.5999/aps.2021.00808 34818706
Song KH et al (2021) Volumetric change of the latissimus dorsi muscle after postoperative chemotherapy and radiotherapy in immediate breast reconstruction with an extended latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap: final results from serial studies. Arch Plast Surg 48(6):607–61334818706
22. Yamaguchi K Quantitative analysis of free flap volume changes in head and neck reconstruction Head Neck 2012 34 10 1403 1407 10.1002/hed.21944 22083831
Yamaguchi K et al (2012) Quantitative analysis of free flap volume changes in head and neck reconstruction. Head Neck 34(10):1403–140722083831
23. Suga H Adipose tissue remodeling under ischemia: death of adipocytes and activation of stem/progenitor cells Plast Reconstr Surg 2010 126 6 1911 1923 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f4468b 21124131
Suga H et al (2010) Adipose tissue remodeling under ischemia: death of adipocytes and activation of stem/progenitor cells. Plast Reconstr Surg 126(6):1911–192321124131
24. Shin YS Radiotherapy deteriorates postoperative functional outcome after partial glossectomy with free flap reconstruction J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2012 70 1 216 220 10.1016/j.joms.2011.04.014 21820228
Shin YS et al (2012) Radiotherapy deteriorates postoperative functional outcome after partial glossectomy with free flap reconstruction. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 70(1):216–22021820228
25. Tarsitano A Microvascular reconstruction of the tongue using a free anterolateral thigh flap: three-dimensional evaluation of volume loss after radiotherapy J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2016 44 9 1287 1291 10.1016/j.jcms.2016.04.031 27524383
Tarsitano A et al (2016) Microvascular reconstruction of the tongue using a free anterolateral thigh flap: three-dimensional evaluation of volume loss after radiotherapy. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 44(9):1287–129127524383
26. Guelinckx PJ Scanning electron microscopy of irradiated recipient blood vessels in head and neck free flaps Plast Reconstr Surg 1984 74 2 217 226 10.1097/00006534-198408000-00008 6463146
Guelinckx PJ et al (1984) Scanning electron microscopy of irradiated recipient blood vessels in head and neck free flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 74(2):217–2266463146
27. Yushkevich PA User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability NeuroImage 2006 31 3 1116 1128 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.01.015 16545965
Yushkevich PA et al (2006) User-guided 3D active contour segmentation of anatomical structures: significantly improved efficiency and reliability. NeuroImage 31(3):1116–112816545965
28. Yushkevich PA Yang G Gerig G ITK-SNAP: an interactive tool for semi-automatic segmentation of multi-modality biomedical images Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2016 2016 3342 3345 28269019
Yushkevich PA, Yang G, Gerig G (2016) ITK-SNAP: an interactive tool for semi-automatic segmentation of multi-modality biomedical images. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2016:3342–334528269019
29. Riekert M Volumetric analysis and clinical outcome in 54 patients with Retrobulbar Hematoma J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2021 79 9 1914 1920 10.1016/j.joms.2021.05.004 34153252
Riekert M et al (2021) Volumetric analysis and clinical outcome in 54 patients with Retrobulbar Hematoma. J Oral Maxillofac Surg 79(9):1914–192034153252
30. Lentzen MP Bisphosphonate application and volumetric effects on MRONJ lesions J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2021 49 6 501 507 10.1016/j.jcms.2021.01.014 33853745
Lentzen MP et al (2021) Bisphosphonate application and volumetric effects on MRONJ lesions. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 49(6):501–50733853745
31. Ngo MT et al (2021) Improving blood Flow visualization of recirculation regions at carotid bulb in 4D Flow MRI using semi-automatic segmentation with ITK-SNAP. Diagnostics (Basel), 11(10)
32. Gau K Accuracy and practical aspects of semi- and fully automatic segmentation methods for resected brain areas Neuroradiology 2020 62 12 1637 1648 10.1007/s00234-020-02481-1 32691076
Gau K et al (2020) Accuracy and practical aspects of semi- and fully automatic segmentation methods for resected brain areas. Neuroradiology 62(12):1637–164832691076
33. Bozec A Radical ablative surgery and radial forearm free flap (RFFF) reconstruction for patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer: postoperative outcomes and oncologic and functional results Acta Otolaryngol 2009 129 6 681 687 10.1080/00016480802369260 18720078
Bozec A et al (2009) Radical ablative surgery and radial forearm free flap (RFFF) reconstruction for patients with oral or oropharyngeal cancer: postoperative outcomes and oncologic and functional results. Acta Otolaryngol 129(6):681–68718720078
34. Ritschl LM Bone volume change following vascularized free bone flap reconstruction of the mandible J Craniomaxillofac Surg 2020 48 9 859 867 10.1016/j.jcms.2020.07.011 32792109
Ritschl LM et al (2020) Bone volume change following vascularized free bone flap reconstruction of the mandible. J Craniomaxillofac Surg 48(9):859–86732792109
35. Ng RW Clinical implications of anterolateral thigh flap shrinkage Laryngoscope 2008 118 4 585 588 10.1097/MLG.0b013e31816067a3 18176347
Ng RW et al (2008) Clinical implications of anterolateral thigh flap shrinkage. Laryngoscope 118(4):585–58818176347
36. Stacey D et al Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Reviews, 2017(4).
37. Mardinger C et al (2023) Breast Reconstruction decision aids decrease Decisional Conflict and improve decisional satisfaction: a Randomized Controlled Trial, vol 151. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2
38. Iandelli A et al (2024) Donor site scar preference in head and neck free flap reconstruction: the patient point of view. Oral Oncol Rep, 10
39. Kim M-S Assessment of Chronological volume changes in Radial Forearm Free flaps for Tongue Cancer ORL 2020 82 1 40 46 10.1159/000504196
Kim M-S et al (2020) Assessment of Chronological volume changes in Radial Forearm Free flaps for Tongue Cancer. ORL 82(1):40–46
40. Avery CM Review of the radial free flap: is it still evolving, or is it facing extinction? Part one: soft-tissue radial flap Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2010 48 4 245 252 10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.09.004 19837491
Avery CM (2010) Review of the radial free flap: is it still evolving, or is it facing extinction? Part one: soft-tissue radial flap. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48(4):245–25219837491
41. Loeffelbein DJ Reduction of donor site morbidity of free radial forearm flaps: what level of evidence is available? Eplasty 2012 12 e9 22331991
Loeffelbein DJ et al (2012) Reduction of donor site morbidity of free radial forearm flaps: what level of evidence is available? Eplasty 12:e922331991
42. Bardsley AF et al (1990) Reducing morbidity in the radial forearm flap donor site. Plast Reconstr Surg, 86(2): p. 287 – 92; discussion 293-4.
43. Richardson D Radial forearm flap donor-site complications and morbidity: a prospective study Plast Reconstr Surg 1997 99 1 109 115 10.1097/00006534-199701000-00017 8982193
Richardson D et al (1997) Radial forearm flap donor-site complications and morbidity: a prospective study. Plast Reconstr Surg 99(1):109–1158982193
44. Park SU Shim JS Assessment of breast volume change after transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap Arch Plast Surg 2012 39 6 631 635 10.5999/aps.2012.39.6.631 23233889
Park SU, Shim JS (2012) Assessment of breast volume change after transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap. Arch Plast Surg 39(6):631–63523233889
45. Thoenissen P et al (2020) Three-Dimensional magnetic resonance imaging volumetry of Radial Forearm Flap reconstructions after Craniomaxillofacial Tumor Resection. J Craniofac Surg, 31(5)
46. Xu Q Comparing donor site morbidity between radial and ulnar forearm free flaps: a meta-analysis Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2022 60 5 547 553 10.1016/j.bjoms.2021.10.014 35437195
Xu Q et al (2022) Comparing donor site morbidity between radial and ulnar forearm free flaps: a meta-analysis. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 60(5):547–55335437195
47. Zirk M Volumetric analysis of MRONJ lesions by semiautomatic segmentation of CBCT images Oral Maxillofac Surg 2019 23 4 465 472 10.1007/s10006-019-00805-x 31673817
Zirk M et al (2019) Volumetric analysis of MRONJ lesions by semiautomatic segmentation of CBCT images. Oral Maxillofac Surg 23(4):465–47231673817
48. Younis PA Volumetric changes in post hemiglossectomy reconstruction with anterolateral thigh free flap versus radial forearm free flap Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 2024 53 6 470 474 10.1016/j.ijom.2023.12.003 38114394
Younis PA et al (2024) Volumetric changes in post hemiglossectomy reconstruction with anterolateral thigh free flap versus radial forearm free flap. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg 53(6):470–47438114394
