Comparison Between the Digital Artery Perforator Flaps and the Distant Flaps within Hand.
- Author:
Pil Dong CHO
1
;
Min Seon MOON
;
Keuk Shun SHIN
Author Information
1. Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Myongji Hospital, Kwandong University College of Medicine, Goyang, Korea. pildong@naver.com
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Digital artery perforator flap;
Distant flap within hand;
Thenar flap;
Hypothenar flap
- MeSH:
Arteries;
Fingers;
Follow-Up Studies;
Hand;
Hospitalization;
Humans;
Length of Stay;
Operative Time;
Perforator Flap;
Retrospective Studies;
Skin;
Tissue Donors;
Transplants
- From:Journal of the Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons
2010;37(1):52-58
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: The digital artery perforator flap was recently introduced and has been proven to be useful for reconstruction of various finger defects. Short operative time, less invasive surgery, and reliable flap circulation are the major advantages of this flap. The authors presented the clinical cases of the digital artery perforator flap and compared them with the distant flaps within a hand (thenar and hypothenar flaps) to reveal their differences. METHODS: From May of 2006 to February of 2009, the authors performed reconstructions of finger defects with the digital artery perforator flaps in 10 patients as with the distant flaps within hand in 9 patients (7 thenar and 2 hypothenar flaps). In these two groups of the patients, flap size, use of skin graft, length of stay in hospital, healing time, complications were reviewed retrospectively and compared with statistical analysis (Student's t-test). RESULTS: All flaps survived completely. The mean size of the perforator flap was 0.9 x 1.9 cm and the mean distant flap within a hand was 1.9 x 2.0 cm. The use of skin graft was reduced in the perforator group because the donor site of the flap was closed primarily. The hospitalization period and healing time also reduced significantly in the perforator group. Minor complications (partial flap loss) were noted in small percentages in both groups but resolved with conservative management. Mean follow-up period was about 6 weeks. CONCLUSION: The digital artery perforator flap was smaller than the distant flap but its reconstruction of finger defects was reliable and comparable to the conventional distant flaps within a hand. This flap would be not only an alternative method but very useful in the management of various finger defects, because of ease of operative technique, less invasive surgery, decreased need of skin graft, and shorter period of hospitalization and healing time.
