Gohla T, Kehrer A, Holle G, Megerle K, Germann G, Sauerbier M
Klinik für Hand-, Plastische und Rekonstruktive Chirurgie, Schwerbrandverletztenzentrum, Berufsgenossenschaftliche Unfallklinik Ludwigshafen, Klinik für Plastische und Handchirurgie der Universität Heidelberg, 67071 Ludwigshafen.
Unfallchirurg. 2007 Jan;110(1):5-13. doi: 10.1007/s00113-006-1203-5.
Free coverage of exposed functional structures of the hand and distal forearm can be achieved using a variety of free flaps. However, there is a lack of data in the literature which tissue components are best used for defect coverage of this specific area regarding aspects such as tendon gliding and tissue elasticity. The purpose of this retrospective study was to compare and to evaluate the functional and aesthetical results using free cutaneous, fascial and muscle flaps.
Between 1994 and 2002, a total of 56 patients underwent free flap coverage at the dorsal side of the hand and forearm at our institution. Of these patients, 20 with 21 free flaps met the study criteria and were available for follow-up examination. Depending on the tissue component used patients were allocated into three different groups. In group 1 eight patients received a fascial flap, in group 2 eight a cutaneous flap and in group 3 five a muscle flap. The mean follow-up was 50 months (range: 4-103 months). At follow-up examination the patients answered the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire (CSQ 8) and the DASH questionnaire.
Regarding range of motion of the wrist and fingers, fascial flaps clearly showed the best results. Concerning grip strength and pinch grip, fascial and cutaneous flaps demonstrated the same results. Patients with cutaneous flaps showed the best DASH score. Regarding the overall aesthetical outcome, fascial and cutaneous flaps were far better than muscle flaps. Donor site morbidity was lowest for fascial flaps followed by muscle flaps and was highest for cutaneous flaps.
Cutaneous and fascial flaps had the best functional and aesthetical results. Fascial flaps achieved the best aesthetical outcome of the donor site. We recommend free fascial flaps and cutaneous flaps as the first choice due to their advantages in the specific area of the dorsal site of the hand and distal forearm which requires pliable and thin tissue coverage.
使用多种游离皮瓣可实现手部和前臂远端暴露功能结构的游离覆盖。然而,文献中缺乏关于在肌腱滑动和组织弹性等方面,哪些组织成分最适合用于该特定区域缺损覆盖的数据。这项回顾性研究的目的是比较和评估使用游离皮瓣、筋膜瓣和肌瓣的功能及美学效果。
1994年至2002年间,共有56例患者在我院接受了手部和前臂背侧的游离皮瓣覆盖手术。其中,20例患者的21个游离皮瓣符合研究标准并可进行随访检查。根据所使用的组织成分,将患者分为三个不同的组。第1组8例患者接受了筋膜瓣,第2组8例接受了皮瓣,第3组5例接受了肌瓣。平均随访时间为50个月(范围:4 - 103个月)。在随访检查中,患者回答了客户满意度问卷(CSQ 8)和DASH问卷。
关于腕关节和手指的活动范围,筋膜瓣明显显示出最佳效果。关于握力和捏力,筋膜瓣和皮瓣显示出相同的结果。皮瓣患者的DASH评分最佳。关于整体美学效果,筋膜瓣和皮瓣远优于肌瓣。供区并发症发生率筋膜瓣最低,其次是肌瓣,皮瓣最高。
皮瓣和筋膜瓣具有最佳的功能和美学效果。筋膜瓣在供区实现了最佳美学效果。由于在手部背侧和前臂远端特定区域需要柔软且薄的组织覆盖,我们推荐游离筋膜瓣和皮瓣作为首选。