Economides James M, DeFazio Michael V, Golshani Kayvon, Cinque Mark, Anghel Ersilia L, Attinger Christopher E, Evans Karen Kim
Department of Plastic Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA.
Arch Plast Surg. 2017 Mar;44(2):124-135. doi: 10.5999/aps.2017.44.2.124. Epub 2017 Mar 15.
In cases of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) threatened by potential hardware exposure, flap-based reconstruction is indicated to provide durable coverage. Historically, muscle flaps were favored as they provide vascular tissue to an infected wound bed. However, data comparing the performance of muscle versus fasciocutaneous flaps are limited and reflect a lack of consensus regarding the optimal management of these wounds. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of muscle versus fasciocutaneous flaps following the salvage of compromised TKA.
A systematic search and meta-analysis were performed to identify patients with TKA who underwent either pedicled muscle or fasciocutaneous flap coverage of periprosthetic knee defects. Studies evaluating implant/limb salvage rates, ambulatory function, complications, and donor-site morbidity were included in the comparative analysis.
A total of 18 articles, corresponding to 172 flaps (119 muscle flaps and 53 fasciocutaneous flaps) were reviewed. Rates of implant salvage (88.8% vs. 90.1%, P=0.05) and limb salvage (89.8% vs. 100%, P=0.14) were comparable in each cohort. While overall complication rates were similar (47.3% vs. 44%, P=0.78), the rates of persistent infection (16.4% vs. 0%, P=0.14) and recurrent infection (9.1% vs. 4%, P=0.94) tended to be higher in the muscle flap cohort. Notably, functional outcomes and ambulation rates were sparingly reported.
Rates of limb and prosthetic salvage were comparable following muscle or fasciocutaneous flap coverage of compromised TKA. The functional morbidity associated with muscle flap harvest, however, may support the use of fasciocutaneous flaps for coverage of these defects, particularly in young patients and/or high-performance athletes.
在全膝关节置换术(TKA)面临潜在内植物暴露风险的病例中,采用皮瓣重建术可提供持久的覆盖。从历史上看,肌皮瓣更受青睐,因为它们能为感染的创面床提供血管化组织。然而,比较肌皮瓣与筋膜皮瓣性能的数据有限,这反映出在这些伤口的最佳处理方法上缺乏共识。本研究的目的是比较挽救失败的TKA后肌皮瓣与筋膜皮瓣的治疗效果。
进行系统检索和荟萃分析,以确定接受带蒂肌皮瓣或筋膜皮瓣覆盖人工膝关节周围缺损的TKA患者。比较分析纳入了评估植入物/肢体挽救率、行走功能、并发症和供区发病率的研究。
共检索到18篇文章,对应172例皮瓣(119例肌皮瓣和53例筋膜皮瓣)。每组的植入物挽救率(88.8%对90.1%,P = 0.05)和肢体挽救率(89.8%对100%,P = 0.14)相当。虽然总体并发症发生率相似(47.3%对44%,P = 0.78),但肌皮瓣组的持续感染率(16.4%对0%,P = 0.14)和复发感染率(9.1%对4%,P = 0.94)往往更高。值得注意的是,功能结局和行走率的报告较少。
在挽救失败的TKA中,肌皮瓣或筋膜皮瓣覆盖后的肢体和假体挽救率相当。然而,与获取肌皮瓣相关的功能损害可能支持使用筋膜皮瓣覆盖这些缺损,特别是在年轻患者和/或高水平运动员中。