Luchetti R, Riccio M, Papini Zorli I, Fairplay T
Rimini Hand and Upper Extremities Centre, Rimini, Italy.
Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir. 2006 Oct;38(5):317-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2006-924551.
The aim of the study is to present our experience with fascial or fasciocutaneous pedicle and island flaps in the treatment of recurrences of CTS with and without median nerve lesions.
From 1987 to 2006 we have operated on 25 patients (17 women and 8 men, ages ranging from 38 to 76 years with a mean age of 55 years) due to a recurrence of CTS. All the patients required nerve coverage using a local or distant flap. There were 19 hypothenar fat flaps; two forearm radial artery flaps, a forearm ulnar artery flap, an ulnar fascial-fat flap and a posterior interosseous flap. Patients were clinically and instrumentally evaluated before the operation. Assessments of the evaluation parameters were classified in excellent, good, fair and poor according to clinical and return to work criteria.
Patients were evaluated after a mean follow-up of 51 months (12 to 168 months). The pain evaluation showed an improvement passing from a mean value of 9 to 4. The best results were for those patients in whom the median nerve was undamaged (mean value of 1). Eleven patients obtained excellent results; good results were obtained in twelve cases; two patients demonstrated fair results due to partial median nerve injury. In these cases, a hypothenar fat flap and an ulnar fascial-fat flap were used, respectively.
Protective coverage of the median nerve by using fascial or fasciocutaneous flaps after failure of CTR and/or unsuccessful re-operations is a good solution to furnish to the median nerve a gliding tissue to avoid adherences with the surrounding tissue of previous surgery. The protection of the nerve can reduce painful symptoms even if it does not permit a return to a painless condition. However, the clinical results in terms of median nerve functional recovery cannot be predicted: if the median nerve is damaged, protective coverage of it by flaps cannot give a favourable result in terms of recovery of both sensory and motor deficits.
本研究的目的是介绍我们使用筋膜蒂或筋膜皮蒂岛状皮瓣治疗伴有或不伴有正中神经损伤的腕管综合征复发的经验。
1987年至2006年,我们对25例因腕管综合征复发而接受手术的患者(17名女性和8名男性,年龄在38至76岁之间,平均年龄55岁)进行了手术。所有患者均需要使用局部或远处皮瓣进行神经覆盖。其中有19块小鱼际脂肪皮瓣;两块前臂桡动脉皮瓣、一块前臂尺动脉皮瓣、一块尺侧筋膜脂肪皮瓣和一块骨间后皮瓣。术前对患者进行了临床和器械评估。根据临床和恢复工作标准,将评估参数的评估分为优秀、良好、中等和差。
平均随访51个月(12至168个月)后对患者进行评估。疼痛评估显示平均值从9改善到4。正中神经未受损的患者效果最佳(平均值为1)。11例患者获得了优秀的结果;12例获得了良好的结果;2例因正中神经部分损伤而表现为中等结果。在这些病例中,分别使用了小鱼际脂肪皮瓣和尺侧筋膜脂肪皮瓣。
在腕管松解术失败和/或再次手术不成功后,使用筋膜或筋膜皮瓣对正中神经进行保护性覆盖是一种很好的解决方案,可为正中神经提供一个滑动组织,以避免与先前手术的周围组织粘连。即使不能使患者恢复到无痛状态,神经保护也可以减轻疼痛症状。然而,正中神经功能恢复方面的临床结果无法预测:如果正中神经受损,皮瓣对其进行保护性覆盖在感觉和运动功能缺损的恢复方面不能取得良好的效果。