Wu Jerry Chih-Wei, Huang Jung-Ju, Tsao Chung-Kan, Abdelrahman Mohamed, Kolios Georgios, Cheng Ming-Huei
Taoyuan, Taiwan From the Division of Reconstructive Microsurgery, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and the Center for Tissue Engineering, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Jan;137(1):257-266. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000001880.
The anterolateral thigh perforator flap is a common workhorse flap for head and neck reconstruction. The authors present an alternative method using the posteromedial thigh profunda artery perforator flap and compare its characteristics, outcomes, donor-site morbidity, and donor-site cosmesis with those of the anterolateral thigh perforator flap.
Between May of 2013 and July of 2014, 41 patients undergoing head and neck reconstruction consisting of 18 posteromedial thigh profunda artery perforator flaps and 23 anterolateral thigh perforator flaps were included in this study. Thirty-eight of the patients were men, and the patient age ranged from 32 to 76 years (mean, 54.5 years).
The success rate was 100 percent. The mean number of perforators was significantly higher in the profunda artery perforator flap group (2.0 versus 1.5). There was no significant difference in flap elevation time (66.3 minutes versus 60.7 minutes), pedicle length (9.8 cm versus 10 cm), flap area (166.1 cm versus 156.8 cm), flap width (7.7 cm versus 7.7 cm), reexploration rate, recipient-site complication rate, or donor-site complication rate. Based on patient self-assessment, the profunda artery perforator flap group had significantly better donor-site cosmesis than the anterolateral thigh perforator flap group (satisfaction rate, 100 percent versus 70 percent).
The posteromedial thigh profunda artery perforator flap is a good alternative for head and neck reconstruction. It offers flap size, pedicle length, flap elevation time, and success rate comparable to those of the anterolateral thigh perforator flap. It has more perforators and better donor-site cosmesis than the anterolateral thigh perforator flap.
CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.
股前外侧穿支皮瓣是头颈部重建常用的主力皮瓣。作者介绍了一种使用股后内侧旋股深动脉穿支皮瓣的替代方法,并将其特点、效果、供区并发症及供区美观度与股前外侧穿支皮瓣进行比较。
2013年5月至2014年7月,本研究纳入41例行头颈部重建的患者,其中18例采用股后内侧旋股深动脉穿支皮瓣,23例采用股前外侧穿支皮瓣。患者中38例为男性,年龄32至76岁(平均54.5岁)。
成功率为100%。旋股深动脉穿支皮瓣组平均穿支数量显著更多(2.0个对1.5个)。皮瓣掀起时间(66.3分钟对60.7分钟)、蒂长(9.8厘米对10厘米)、皮瓣面积(166.1平方厘米对156.8平方厘米)及皮瓣宽度(7.7厘米对7.7厘米)、再次探查率、受区并发症率或供区并发症率均无显著差异。根据患者自我评估,股后内侧旋股深动脉穿支皮瓣组供区美观度显著优于股前外侧穿支皮瓣组(满意率分别为100%对70%)。
股后内侧旋股深动脉穿支皮瓣是头颈部重建的良好替代方案。其皮瓣大小、蒂长、皮瓣掀起时间及成功率与股前外侧穿支皮瓣相当。与股前外侧穿支皮瓣相比,它有更多穿支且供区美观度更好。
临床问题/证据级别:治疗性,III级