Reconstruction of Foot and Ankle Defects Using Free Lateral Arm Flap: A Retrospective Review of Its Versatile Application

Background. Successful reconstruction of the feet and ankles remains challenging due to limited quantities of soft tissue and laxity. The free lateral arm flap (LAF) is an alternative to conventional flaps and has been widely used due to advancements in its flap characteristics. This study is aimed at utilizing the advantages of this flap to validate its increased applications for foot and ankle defects. Methods. Twenty patients with various LAF types between May 2011 and May 2020 were enrolled. Clinical data was retrospectively collected, and defect sites were classified according to the subunit principle. We utilized various LAF types, such as LAFs with sensate, extended, osteomyocutaneous, or myocutaneous flaps, as necessary. A two-point discrimination test was performed, and results were statistically compared between flaps. Results. Among the diverse etiologies of skin defects, chronic inflammation was the most common cause of defects. Various LAF types, including LAFs with fasciocutaneous, extended fasciocutaneous, musculocutaneous, and osteomyocutaneous flaps, were used. The versatility of free LAF helped successfully cover various defects in all cases. Results of the two-point discrimination test were statistically significant between groups. Conclusions. Free LAF is a unique soft tissue free flap that is more versatile than other flaps, allowing flaps to be continuously modified and applied to various foot and ankle defects under different clinical conditions.

The Free Lateral Arm Flap—A Reliable Option for Reconstruction of the Forearm and Hand

Background This retrospective study was performed to verify the advantages and disadvantages of the free lateral arm flap for defect reconstruction of the forearm and hand. Patients and Methods Between 2001 and 2010, 21 patients underwent defect coverage of the forearm and hand with the free lateral arm flap. The mean patient age was 48 years (17–78). The results concerning defect origin, flap size, pedicle length, operative time, revisions of the anastomoses or other complications, donor site morbidity, and length of hospital stay were evaluated. Results The majority of defects were caused by infections or chronic wounds. The defects were localized at the forearm in 6 cases and at the hand in 15 cases. The flap width ranged from 3 to 8 cm, and the length was from 5 to 20 cm. All flaps survived. Only in one case, a revision of the anastomosis was necessary. Primary closure of the donor site was possible in all patients. No complications occurred during the healing procedure. The majority of the patients were satisfied with the aesthetic result at the recipient site as well as at the donor site. Conclusion The free lateral arm flap is a very reliable option for defect coverage at the forearm and hand for small and medium size defects. A satisfactory aesthetic appearance, an excellent tissue quality, and frequent primary donor site closure are great advantages for selecting this flap.