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.

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.

Objective:To compare the clinical value of CTA and CDU in perforator flap of peroneal artery.Methods:From February 2013 to October 2016, 47 patients who suffered with soft tissue defects and were hospitalised in the Department of Orthopaedics, the 920th Hospital of Joint Logistic Support Force of Chinese PLA were retrospectively reviewed and evaluated. All the defects were reconstructed by the perforator flap of peroneal artery. All patients received preoperative CTA and CDU scans before surgery. Appropriate perforator vessels were selected and the locating points in body surface and external diameters of the perforator vessels were recorded and compared with intraoperative findings. SPSS 22.0 statistical software was used for data analysis. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results:The intraoperative coincidence rate of the proposed perforator vessels was 97.87% for CDU and 95.74% for CTA, with no significant difference between the 2 groups( P>0.05). It was found that the preoperative CTA and CDU measurements were consistent with the actual intraoperative measurements, and there was no significant difference between the 2 groups( P>0.05). For CTA combined with CDU, an intraoperative coincidence rate was 100% in the location of peroneal perforating vessels. All flaps were followed-up for 1 to 18(mean 13.5) months. All the flaps survived well with good texture and appearance without complication. Conclusion:CDU and CTA are reliable and useful in preoperative vascular evaluation of peroneal perforator flap, and both can be used in a complementary or combined manner.