scholarly journals Microsurgical Reconstruction of the Lower Extremity

2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (01) ◽  
pp. 054-058 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luke Grome ◽  
William Pederson
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Foot Drop ◽  
Long Term Results ◽  
Anterolateral Thigh Flap ◽  
Soft Tissue Coverage ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Muscle Flaps ◽  
Microsurgical Reconstruction

AbstractReconstruction of bony and soft tissue defects of the lower extremity has been revolutionized by the advent of microsurgical tissue transfer. There are numerous options for reconstruction. Possibilities include transfer of soft tissue, composite (bone and soft tissue) tissue, and functional muscle. Many lower extremity reconstructions require staged procedures. Planning is of paramount importance especially in regard to vascular access when multiple free flaps are required. Soft tissue reconstruction of the lower extremity may be accomplished with muscle flaps such as the rectus femoris and latissimus dorsi covered with a skin graft. Fasciocutaneous flaps such as the anterolateral thigh flap may be more appropriate in a staged reconstruction which requires later elevation of the flap. Loss of a significant portion of bone, such as the tibia, can be difficult to manage. Any gap greater than 6 cm is considered a reasonable indication for vascularized bone transfer. The contralateral free fibula is the donor site of choice. Functional reconstruction of the anterior compartment of the leg may be performed with a gracilis muscle transfer, effectively eliminating foot drop and providing soft tissue coverage. Muscle tensioning is critical for effective excursion and dorsiflexion of the foot. Long-term results of microsurgical reconstruction of the lower extremity show good results and reasonable rates of limb salvage.

Preliminary Experience with Perforator Flaps in Reconstruction of Soft-Tissue Defects of the Foot and Ankle

2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 191-197 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frederick J. Duffy ◽  
James W. Brodsky ◽  
Christian T. Royer
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Tissue Loss ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Soft Tissue Defects ◽  
Perforator Flaps ◽  
Microsurgical Reconstruction ◽  
Tissue Defects

Background: Microsurgical reconstruction has improved limb salvage in patients who because of many etiologies have soft-tissue loss from the lower extremities. Free-tissue transfer to the foot and ankle often interferes with postoperative function and footwear because of the bulk of a muscle flap. The foot and ankle often are best treated using thin flaps that will not contract and fibrose, particularly if secondary procedures are required. We hypothesized that perforator flaps, which are thin free-tissue transfers consisting of skin and subcutaneous tissue, both diminish donor site morbidity and are ideally suited for soft-tissue reconstruction of the foot and ankle. Methods: Ten patients had free- tissue transfers to the foot and ankle using perforator flaps during a 2-year period. Four had acute posttraumatic wounds, three had soft tissue defects with exposed hardware or bone graft after reconstructive surgery, and three had large soft-tissue defects after foot infection secondary to diabetes. Nine had reconstruction with anterolateral thigh perforator flaps and one had reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric artery (DIEP) perforator flap. Results: All flaps survived. There were no deep infections. Three flaps had minor tissue loss requiring subsequent small skin grafts, all of which healed. There were no donor site complications and no interference of muscle function at the donor sites. Custom shoewear was not required to accommodate the flaps. Conclusion: This series highlights the success and utility of perforator flaps in microsurgical reconstruction of the foot and ankle. The greatest advantage of perforator flaps is the diminished donor site morbidity, which was achieved while maintaining high microsurgical success rates. These skin and fat flaps remained pliable and contracted less than muscle flaps, allowing for smooth tendon gliding and easy flap elevation for secondary orthopaedic procedures.

Does Laterality of Lower Extremity Donor Site Affect Outcomes in Microvascular Soft Tissue Lower Extremity Reconstruction?

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (04) ◽  
pp. 289-293
Author(s):  
Jason W. Yu ◽  
William J. Rifkin ◽  
Z-Hye Lee ◽  
Zachary Borab ◽  
Allyson R. Alfonso ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Contralateral Side ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Complication Rates ◽  
Flap Survival ◽  
Flap Failure ◽  
Vascular Compromise ◽  
Lower Extremity Reconstruction

Abstract Background There are many different variables to consider in lower extremity microvascular soft tissue reconstruction including flap choice. Our aim is to objectively evaluate recipient complications related to lower extremity donor flap laterality. Methods A total of 77 lower extremity soft tissue reconstructions utilizing microvascular free tissue transfers for Gustilo type III between 1979 and 2016 were collected. We compared complication rates between ipsilateral and contralateral donor sites relative to the injured leg. The following parameters were analyzed: overall complications, total flap failure, partial flap failure, major complications, operative takebacks, and salvage rates. Results In this study, 25 ipsilateral reconstructions were performed, while 52 cases utilized the contralateral leg. Overall complication rates were higher in the ipsilateral group (40.0%) compared with the contralateral side (23.1%) but were not statistically significant (p = 0.12). The ipsilateral group was four times as likely to experience vascular compromise (24.0 vs. 5.8%; p = 0.05). However, there were no significant differences in complications, flap failures or flap survival. Mean operative time was significantly greater in the same side group as compared with the contralateral group (11.3 vs. 7.5 hours; p = 0.006). Conclusion Although there is a higher risk of anastomotic thrombosis, particularly venous thrombosis, associated with ipsilateral donor-site group, there were no significant differences in complications or flap survival. Flaps can be harvested from a traumatized leg with acceptable complication rates while avoiding the morbidity of operating on an uninjured limb.

Soft Tissue Reconstruction

2020 ◽  
pp. 63-74
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Lower Limb ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Free Flaps ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Open Fractures ◽  
Soft Tissue Coverage ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Wound Excision

Soft tissue coverage of open fractures with well-vascularised tissues should be performed within 72 hours of injury or at the same time as internal fixation. It may be in the form of local or free flaps, and may comprise muscle, fasciocutaneous tissues, or both. Flap selection depends on multiple factors, including the size and location of the defect following wound excision, availability of flaps, and donor site morbidity. Local flaps are usually used to cover defects with a limited zone of injury. Anastomoses for free flaps should be performed outside the zone of injury. Experimental data suggest that coverage with muscle leads to improved healing of fractures. However, there is currently little clinical evidence to support the use of one form of soft tissue cover over another for open fractures of the lower limb. The plastic surgeon must always consider the donor site morbidity of the flap(s) chosen.

scholarly journals Experiência de um hospital de referência com o retalho livre anterolateral da coxa na reconstrução de extremidades

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nikolas Higa Benites ◽  
Guilherme Leipner Margatho ◽  
Fernanda Ruiz de Andrade ◽  
Luis Guilherme Rosifini Alves Rezende ◽  
Amanda Favaro Cagnolati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Free Flap ◽  
Donor Site ◽  
Free Flaps ◽  
Donor Site Morbidity ◽  
Anterolateral Thigh Flap ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Anterolateral Thigh ◽  
Anterolateral Thigh Flaps ◽  
The Impact

Introdução: Com a evolução da microcirurgia ao longo dos anos o Retalho Anterolateral da Coxa vem se tornando uma das principais opções para reconstruções na cabeça, pescoço, tronco e extremidades devido sua versatilidade e confiabilidade. Objetivo: Descrever dados de um hospital terciário referência em trauma na reconstrução de extremidades com o Retalho Anterolateral da Coxa. Método: Este é um estudo retrospectivo de 18 retalhos Anterolateral da Coxa microcirúrgicos realizados entre Março de 2016 e Outubro de 2019 em pacientes de todas as idades, na reconstrução de membros, onde se observou dados referentes ao paciente: idade, sexo, membro acometido, tempo entre a lesão e a confecção do retalho; ao intraoperatório: anatomia dos vasos perfurantes, tempo cirúrgico total, vasos receptores utilizados; e informações do pós-operatório: número de cirurgias relacionadas ao retalho, necessidade de reabordagem e número de perdas. Foram excluídos pacientes que perderam seguimento ou que apresentaram dados do prontuário incompletos. Realizou-se estatística descritiva e cruzamento de algumas variáveis utilizando o teste t-Student. Resultados: Nas reconstruções houve predomínio de pacientes do sexo masculino (72%), em idade produtiva, de etiologia traumática e nos membros inferiores. O tempo médio até a reconstrução foi de 21 dias e o tempo cirúrgico foi de 384 minutos. O paciente permaneceu, em média, 39 dias internado. Dos 18 retalhos, 3 evoluíram com necrose, 2 por trombose arterial e 1 por infecção. 6 retalhos necessitaram de reaborgadem de emergência, 3 por sangramento, 2 por congestão e 1 por infecção. Foram realizadas uma média de 3 cirurgias até a alta. Foram identificadas 15 perfurantes miocutâneas (83%) e 3 septocutâneas (17%). A análise do sucesso do retalho em relação ao tempo cirúrgico e dos dias até a cirurgia não mostrou significância estatística, assim como a necessidade de reabordagem em relação ao tempo cirúrgico. Conclusão: O retalho Anterolateral da Coxa mostrou-se confiável, além de apresentar diversas vantagens como: por ser retirado com uma grande ilha de pele, apresentar pedículo longo, vasos de bom calibre, não necessitar de mudança de decúbito e apresentar baixa morbidade da área doadora.Descritores: Retalho Miocutâneo; Microcirurgia; Hospitais Especializados.ReferênciasDaniel RK, Taylor GI. Distant transfer of an island flap by microvascular anastomoses. A clinical technique. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1973;52(2):111-17.Ninkovic M, Voigt S, Dornseifer U, Lorenz S, Ninkovic M. Microsurgical advances in extremity salvage. Clin Plast Surg. 2012;39(4):491-505.Tamimy MS, Rashid M, Ehtesham-ul-Haq, Aman S, Aslam A, Ahmed RS. Has the anterolateral thigh flap replaced the latissimus dorsi flap as the workhorse for lower limb reconstructions? J Pak Med Assoc. 2010; 60(2):76-81.Spyropoulou A, Jeng SF. Microsurgical coverage reconstruction in upper and lower extremities. Semin Plast Surg. 2010;24(1):34-42.Xiong L, Gazyakan E, Kremer T, Hernekamp FJ, Harhaus L, Saint-Cyr M et al. Free flaps for reconstruction of soft tissue defects in lower extremity: a meta-analysis on microsurgical outcome and safety. Microsurgery. 2016; 36(6):511-24.Song YG, Chen GZ, Song YL. The free thigh flap: a new free flap concepted based on the septocutaneous artery. Br J Plast Surg. 1984; 37(2):149-59.Wei FC, Jain V, Celik N, Chen HC, Chuang DC, Lin CH. Have we found an ideal soft-tissue flap? An experience with 672 anterolateral thigh flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;109(7):2219-26Kimata Y, Uchiyama K, Ebihara S, Nakatsuka T, Harii K. Anatomic variation and technical problems of the anterolateral thigh flap: A report of 74 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998; 102(5):1517-23Spindler N, Al-Benna S, Ring A, Homann H, Steinsträsser L, Steinau HU et al. Free anterolateral thigh flaps for upper extremity soft tissue reconstruction. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW. 2015;4:Doc05.Kimura N, Satoh K, Hasumi T, Ostuka T. Clinical application of the free thin anterolateral thigh flap in 31 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;108(5):1197-210.Collins J, Ayeni O, Thoma A. A systematic review of anterolateral thigh flap donor site morbidity. Can J Plast Surg. 2012;20(1):17-23.Kuo YR, Jeng SF, Kuo MH, Huang MN, Liu YT, Chiang YC et al. Free anterolateral thigh flap for extremity reconstruction: Clinical experience and functional assessment of donor site. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107(7):1766-71Novak CB, Lipa JE, Noria S, Allison K, Neligan PC, Gilbert RW. Comparison of anterolateral thigh and radial forearm free flap donor site morbidity. Microsurgery. 2007;27(8):651-54.Pagano M, Gauvreau K. Princípios de Bioestatística. São Paulo: Pioneira Thomson Learning; 2004.SAS Institute Inc., SAS/STAT® User’s Guide. Version 9.4. Cary, NC: SAS Institute Inc.Arruda LRP, Silva MAC, Malerba FG, Turíbio FM, Fernandes MC, Matsumoto MH. Fraturas expostas: estudo epidemiológico e prospectivo. Acta ortop bras. 2009;17(6):326-30.Cunha FM, Braga GF, Drumond Jr SN, Figueiredo CTO. Epidemiologia de 1.212 fraturas expostas. Rev Bras Ortop. 1998;33(6):451-56.Court-Brown CM, Rimmer S, Prakash U, McQueen MM. The epidemiology of open long bone fractures. Injury. 1998;29(7):529-34.Shabtai M, Rosin D, Zmora O, Munz Y, Scarlat A, Shabtai EL et al. The impact of a resident’s seniority on operative time and length of hospital stay for laparoscopic appendectomy: outcomes used to measure the resident’s laparoscopic skills. Surg Endosc. 2004;18(9):1328-30.Godina M. Early microsurgical reconstruction of complex trauma of the extremities. Plast Reconstr Surg.1986;78:285-292Smit JM, Acosta R, Zeebregts CJ, Liss AG, Anniko M, Hartman EH. Early reintervention of compromised free flaps improves success rate. Microsurgery. 2007;27(7):612-16.

scholarly journals Extremity soft tissue coverage in the combat zone: use of pedicled flap transfers by the deployed orthopedic surgeon

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Laurent MATHIEU ◽  
Soryapong PLANG ◽  
Nicolas de l’ESCALOPIER ◽  
James Charles MURISON ◽  
Christophe GAILLARD ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Pedicled Flap ◽  
Soft Tissue Coverage ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Fasciocutaneous Flaps ◽  
Muscle Flaps ◽  
Reconstructive Procedures ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeon ◽  
Orthopedic Surgeons ◽  
The Mean

Abstract Background In theaters of operation, military orthopedic surgeons have to deal with complex open extremity injuries and perform soft-tissue reconstruction on local patients who cannot be evacuated. Our objective was to evaluate the outcomes and discuss practical issues regarding the use of pedicled flap transfers performed in the combat zone on local national patients. Methods A retrospective study was conducted on data from patients treated by a single orthopedic surgeon during four tours in Chad, Afghanistan and Mali between 2010 and 2017. All pedicled flap transfers performed on extremity soft-tissue defects were included, and two groups were analyzed: combat-related injuries (CRIs) and non-combat related injuries (NCRIs). Results Forty-one patients with a mean age of 25.6 years were included. In total, 46 open injuries required flap coverage: 19 CRIs and 27 NCRIs. Twenty of these injuries were infected. The mean number of prior debridements was significantly higher in the CRIs group. Overall, 63 pedicled flap transfers were carried out: 15 muscle flaps, 35 local fasciocutaneous flaps and 13 distant fasciocutaneous flaps. The flap types used did not differ for CRIs or NCRIs. Complications included one flap failure, one partial flap necrosis and six deep infections. At the mean follow-up time of 71 days, limb salvage had been successful in 38 of the 41 cases. There were no significant differences between CRIs and NCRIs in terms of endpoint assessment. Conclusions Satisfying results can be achieved by simple pedicled flaps performed by orthopedic surgeons deployed in forward surgical units. Most complications were related to failure of bone infection treatment. The teaching of such basic reconstructive procedures should be part of the training for any military orthopedic surgeon. Trial registration Retrospectively registered on January 2019 (n°2019–090 1-001).

Patient and Surgical Factors Contributing to Perioperative Infection in Complex Lower Extremity Trauma

2016 ◽  
Vol 82 (10) ◽  
pp. 940-943 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karen E. Burtt ◽  
Alexis D. Rounds ◽  
Hyuma A. Leland ◽  
Ram K. Alluri ◽  
Ketan M. Patel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Limb Salvage ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Soft Tissue Coverage ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Infection Rates ◽  
Lower Extremity Injuries ◽  
Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Extremity Injuries

Infections in the traumatized lower extremity are a significant source of morbidity and expense. Outcomes after vascularized soft tissue reconstruction were analyzed to determine impact on infection rates. A retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database was performed, including 114 trauma patients requiring soft tissue reconstruction of lower extremity injuries at an urban Level I tertiary referral center from 2008 to 2015. Patient characteristics and perioperative outcomes were analyzed. After trauma, 39 (34.2%) patients developed wound infections, of which 74.4 per cent of infections occurred before soft tissue coverage. Isolated lower extremity injury yielded a 4-fold increase in the incidence of infection. Infection rates doubled in patients who smoked, sustained a fall, had a proximal third of the lower leg wound, or underwent external fixation. Comorbid diabetes, underlying fracture, and wound size were not predictive of infection. Overall, there was a 97.4 per cent rate of limb salvage after soft tissue reconstruction. In patients with infection before soft tissue reconstruction, a salvage rate of 96.6 per cent was achieved. Soft tissue reconstruction in the traumatized and infected lower extremity resulted in high limb salvage success rates, demonstrating vascularized tissue transfer in lower extremity injuries is effective in treating lower extremity infection.

Principles of Orthoplastic Surgery for Lower Extremity Reconstruction: Why Is This Important?

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saïd C. Azoury ◽  
John T. Stranix ◽  
Stephen J. Kovach ◽  
L. Scott Levin
Keyword(s):  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Lower Extremity ◽  
Limb Salvage ◽  
Soft Tissue Coverage ◽  
Soft Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Treatment Team ◽  
Management Protocol ◽  
Lower Extremity Reconstruction ◽  
Tissue Reconstruction ◽  
Extremity Reconstruction

Abstract Background Regardless of the antecedent etiology, lower extremity salvage and reconstruction attempts to avoid amputation, restore limb function, and improve quality of life outcomes. This goal requires a treatment team well versed in neurovascular pathology, skeletal and soft tissue reconstruction, and physical rehabilitation. Methods A review was performed of historical milestones that lead to the development of orthoplastic extremity reconstruction, principles of current management and the evidence that supports an orthoplastic approach. Based on available evidence and expert opinion, the authors further sought to provide insight into the future of the field centered around the importance of a multidisciplinary management protocol. Results Historically, orthopaedic and plastic surgeons worked separately when faced with challenging reconstructive cases involving lower extremity skeletal and soft tissue reconstruction. With time, many embraced that their seemingly separate skill-sets and knowledge could be unified in a collaborative orthoplastic approach in order to offer patients the best possible chance for success. First coined by the senior author (LSL) in the early 1990s, the collaborative orthoplastic approach between orthopaedic and plastic surgeons in limb salvage for the past several decades has resulted in a unique field of reconstructive surgery. Benefits of the orthoplastic approach include decreased time to definitive skeletal stabilization/soft tissue coverage, length of hospital stay, post-operative complications, need for revision procedures and improved functional outcomes. Conclusion The orthoplastic approach to lower extremity reconstruction is a collaborative model of orthopaedic and plastic surgeons working together to expedite and optimize care of patients in need of lower extremity reconstruction. The implementation of protocols, systems, and centers that foster this approach leads to improve outcomes for these patients. We encourage centers to embrace the orthoplastic approach when considering limb salvage, as the decision to amputate is irreversible.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document