Table 1 Historical development of omental transplantation

Late 19 th Century

Kenneth et al. (1877) [30]

The omentum could act as a plug in small penetrating abdominal wounds, preventing the protrusion of other viscera

Senn et al. (1888) [31]

Omental graft can be firmly adherent to the intestine within 12 to 18 h and well-supplied with blood vessels within 18 to 48 h

Mid-20 th Century

Williams et al. (1953) [33]

Omentum grafting stimulated endothelial growth both intrinsic to the grafts and in the vessels upon which the grafts were placed

Pettet et al. (1956) [32]

The free or pedicled omental grafts can be used in intestinal anastomoses, gastrointestinal tract perforations, and covering denuded peritoneal surfaces

Late 20 th Century to Present

Breton et al. (1990) [34]

The research emphasizes the practical benefits of omental flaps, such as high plasticity and reduced morbidity, while also noting significant drawbacks like excessive mucus production and the requirement for abdominal surgery

Carlson et al. (1997) [35]

The gastro-omental flap for pharyngeal reconstruction after extensive radiation highlights the flap’s versatility and potential as a secondary option in complex cases

Cheung et al. (1997) [36]

The omental transposition for breast cancer recurrence underscores the procedure’s viability but may not provide long-term solutions for all patients

Patel et al. (2009) [37]

The gastro-omental flap provides a viable option in high-risk patients undergoing circumferential pharyngeal reconstruction

Vidhyadharan et al. (2018) [38]

1. Speech and swallowing were good, especially after partial glossectomy

2. Gastric mucosal flaps tolerated radiation well

Righini et al. (2021) [39]

The GOFF can restore digestive continuity and reconstruct neck skin in cases of large hypopharyngeal tumors, making it a reliable and robust option, particularly in challenging conditions