Recipient Vessel Utilization in Gracilis Free Functional Muscle Transfer for Facial Reanimation: A 12‐Year Single‐Center Experience

ABSTRACT Background Free functional muscle transfer (FFMT) using the gracilis muscle is a well‐established technique for smile restoration in long‐standing facial paralysis. However, recipient vessel selection remains poorly standardized, particularly when facial vessels are unavailable. This study evaluated recipient vessel utilization, associated clinical outcomes, and potential predictors of alternative vessel selection to propose a practical surgical algorithm. Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing gracilis FFMT for facial reanimation between 2011 and 2022 was performed. Demographic, clinical, and operative characteristics were compared between facial and non‐facial recipient vessel groups using Fisher's exact test and Welch's t ‐test. Exploratory multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with alternative vessel utilization and complications. Results A total of 151 patients were included (mean age, 20.9 ± 18.6 years), predominantly with congenital facial paralysis (68.2.%). Facial vessels were used in 123 cases (81.5%), while alternative vessels were required in 28 (18.5%), most frequently the superficial temporal system. Vascular pedicle and gracilis muscle lengths were significantly longer in the non‐facial vessel group, while ischemia time was shorter. Overall complications occurred in 27.8% of patients, with a flap survival rate of 97.4%. No significant differences were observed between recipient vessel groups in overall complications (26.0% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.351), flap loss, or inadequate muscle activation. Surgical site infections were more frequent in the non‐facial vessel group ( p = 0.023). Exploratory subgroup analyses identified younger age in patients experiencing complete flap loss ( p = 0.017) or inadequate muscle activation ( p = 0.010). Conclusions Facial vessels remain the preferred recipients for gracilis FFMT, with the superficial temporal system providing a suitable alternative. Recipient vessel selection was not associated with significant differences in overall complications, flap survival, or muscle activation. A flexible, anatomy‐guided algorithm may facilitate surgical planning when facial vessels are absent or unsuitable.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Microsurgery
Published
2026-10-31
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.70321
Primary Topic
Facial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Recipient Vessel Utilization in Gracilis Free Functional Muscle Transfer for Facial Reanimation: A 12‐Year Single‐Center Experience

José E. Telich-Tarriba, Lino Enrique Ramírez-Sosa, Alexander Cárdenas‐Mejía, Kenzo Alejandro Fukumoto-Inukai et al.
Microsurgery
Facial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
article

Recipient Vessel Utilization in Gracilis Free Functional Muscle Transfer for Facial Reanimation: A 12‐Year Single‐Center Experience

José E. Telich-Tarriba, Lino Enrique Ramírez-Sosa, Alexander Cárdenas‐Mejía, Kenzo Alejandro Fukumoto-Inukai, Nicole Llamas-Ostos, Osmani Castillo-Garrido
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT Background Free functional muscle transfer (FFMT) using the gracilis muscle is a well‐established technique for smile restoration in long‐standing facial paralysis. However, recipient vessel selection remains poorly standardized, particularly when facial vessels are unavailable. This study evaluated recipient vessel utilization, associated clinical outcomes, and potential predictors of alternative vessel selection to propose a practical surgical algorithm. Methods A retrospective review of patients undergoing gracilis FFMT for facial reanimation between 2011 and 2022 was performed. Demographic, clinical, and operative characteristics were compared between facial and non‐facial recipient vessel groups using Fisher's exact test and Welch's t ‐test. Exploratory multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with alternative vessel utilization and complications. Results A total of 151 patients were included (mean age, 20.9 ± 18.6 years), predominantly with congenital facial paralysis (68.2.%). Facial vessels were used in 123 cases (81.5%), while alternative vessels were required in 28 (18.5%), most frequently the superficial temporal system. Vascular pedicle and gracilis muscle lengths were significantly longer in the non‐facial vessel group, while ischemia time was shorter. Overall complications occurred in 27.8% of patients, with a flap survival rate of 97.4%. No significant differences were observed between recipient vessel groups in overall complications (26.0% vs. 35.7%; p = 0.351), flap loss, or inadequate muscle activation. Surgical site infections were more frequent in the non‐facial vessel group ( p = 0.023). Exploratory subgroup analyses identified younger age in patients experiencing complete flap loss ( p = 0.017) or inadequate muscle activation ( p = 0.010). Conclusions Facial vessels remain the preferred recipients for gracilis FFMT, with the superficial temporal system providing a suitable alternative. Recipient vessel selection was not associated with significant differences in overall complications, flap survival, or muscle activation. A flexible, anatomy‐guided algorithm may facilitate surgical planning when facial vessels are absent or unsuitable.

MicrosurgeryVol. 46(8)
Hospital General Dr. Manuel Gea Gonzalez (MX)
Openalex Percentile: Top 13%
Facial Nerve Paralysis Treatment and Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

Laika access coming soon