A comparative study of anterolateral thigh perforator flap and calf pedicled propeller perforator flap in treatment of soft tissue defect of foot and ankle
10.3760/cma.j.cn441206-20240710-00171
- VernacularTitle:股前外侧穿支皮瓣和小腿穿支螺旋桨皮瓣修复足踝部软组织缺损的对比研究
- Author:
Kaixuan DONG
1
;
Ya ZHOU
;
Xingye LIAN
;
Xi YANG
;
Yuexian XU
;
Yongyue SU
;
Xiaoqing HE
Author Information
1. 云南省第一人民医院骨科，云南省数字骨科重点实验室，云南省吕维佳专家工作站，昆明 650034
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Anterolateral thigh perforator flap;
Calf;
Pedicled propeller perforator flap;
Foot and ankle;
Soft tissue defect;
Reconstruction
- From:
Chinese Journal of Microsurgery
2025;48(2):135-141
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To compare the clinical application of the anterolateral thigh perforator flap (ALTPF) and the calf pedicled propeller perforator flap (PPPF) in reconstruction of soft tissue defect of foot and ankle.Methods:A retrospective observational study was conducted. From March 2013 to June 2019, 48 patients with soft tissue defect around ankle and in foot were reconstructed with ALTPF and PPPF in the Department of Orthopaedics, 920th Hospital of the Joint Logistic Support Force, People's Liberation Army of China. According to the types of flap, the patients were divided into 2 groups: ALTPF group (21 patients,13 males and 8 females, aged 16-67 years, mean 38.71 years±15.30 years. Donor sites were all directly sutured.) and PPPF group (27 patients, 12 males and 15 females, aged 12-69 years, mean 35.18 years±13.96 years. Five cases in the donor site required partial skin grafting, and the rest 22 cases were repaired by directly suture.). The wound size of the former was 5 cm×6 cm-15 cm×18 cm, and at 2 cm×3 cm-14 cm×17 cm for the latter. The surgical time and flap size of the 2 groups were recorded during the surgery. The survival and complications of the flap were observed, and the days of hospital stay were recorded after surgery. Follow-ups were conducted by outpatient clinic and via telephone and WeChat interviews. The colour, texture, appearance, donor scar, complications and thinning of the flap were observed during the follow-up. The ankle function was evaluated according to the score of American Orthopaedic Foot and Ankle Society (AOFAS), and the donor scar was evaluated according to the score of Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS). SPSS 22.0 statistical software was used for data analysis, and P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results:The surgical time for the ALTPF group was 118-203 (154.71±25.42) min, and that for the PPPF group was 52-92 (72.78±10.04) min. The size of the flap in the ALTPF group was 5 cm×8 cm-8 cm×18 cm (75.00 cm 2±8.69 cm 2), while it was 3 cm×7 cm-7 cm×17 cm (53.56 cm 2±19.49 cm 2) in the PPPF group. In the ALTPF group, 3 flaps had vascular complications within 24 hours after surgery, which survived after exploration and thrombectomy. Partial necrosis occurred in 1 flap. The rest 17 flaps survived uneventfully. In the PPPF group, 2 flaps had partial necrosis due to infection and they healed after dressing changes, 3 flaps had venous occlusion and survived after phlebotomy, partial suture removal and massage. The rest 22 flaps in 2 groups survived uneventfully. The postoperative days of hospital stay for the ALTPF group was 6-14 (8.71±2.03) days, and that was 4-12 (6.03±2.16) days in the PPPF group. Flap thinning was performed on 19 flaps in the ALTPF group and 2 in the PPPF group. Follow-up was performed for 7 to 21 months. All the flaps were good in colour, shape and texture. All donor sites healed well. At the final follow-up, 19 patients achieved ankle function of excellent, 1 of good and 1 of fair in the ALTPF group, and 21 patients achieved ankle function of excellent, 4 of good and 2 of fair in the PPPF group, according to the AOFAS. According to the VSS, scores of donor site scar was rated 4-8 (6.33±1.35) points for the ALTPF group, and 3-10 (5.92±1.80) points for the PPPF group. Statistical analysis showed no significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of early postoperative complications, flap survival rate, ankle function, and VSS scores ( P>0.05). However, there were statistically significant differences between the 2 groups in terms of surgical time, hospital stay, flap size, and the number of flap thinning ( P<0.05). Conclusion:Both ALTPF and PPPF have good clinical effects in reconstruction of soft tissue defect of foot and ankle. For small to medium-sized wounds, PPPF is the preferred choice due to the advantages in surgical time and postoperative hospital stay. For larger wounds, the ALTPF is the first choice with multiple surgery.
