Reconstruction of Multiple Digital Defects by Temporary Syndactylization Using a Lateral Arm Free Flap.

Background Soft tissue defects of the multiple finger present challenges to reconstruction surgeons. Here, we introduce the use of a lateral arm free flap and syndactylization for the coverage of multiple finger soft tissue defects. Methods This retrospective study was conducted based on reviews of the medical records of 13 patients with multiple soft tissue defects of fingers ( n = 33) that underwent temporary syndactylization with a microvascular lateral arm flap for temporary syndactylization from January 2010 to December 2020. Surgical and functional outcomes, times of flap division, complications, and demographic data were analyzed. Results Middle fingers were most frequently affected, followed by ring and index fingers. Mean patient age was 43.58 years. The 13 patients had suffered 10 traumas, 2 thermal burns, and 1 scar contracture. Release of temporary syndactyly was performed 3 to 9 weeks after syndactylization. All flaps survived, but partial necrosis occurred in one patient, who required a local transposition flap after syndactylization release. The mean follow-up was 15.8 months. Conclusion Coverage of multiple finger defects by temporary syndactylization using a free lateral arm flap with subsequent division offers an alternative treatment option.

Treatment of deep cavities using a perforator-based island flap with partial de-epithelization.

BACKGROUND: The perforator-based island flap is a popular option for defect coverage. In cases with deep cavities, however, the classical island flap may not be a suitable option. By de-epithelization of the peripheral portion of a perforator-based island flap, the distal part of the flap can be used to fill deep spaces, as the flap can be folded and inserted into the spaces. METHODS: From June 2015 to April 2017, 21 cases of deep internal defects were reconstructed with perforator-based island flaps with peripheral de-epithelization. A fasciocutaneous flap was elevated and rotated with the pivot point on the perforator. After performing de-epithelization on the periphery of the flap, the de-epithelized portion of the flap was inserted and anchored into the internal defect. Demographic information about the patients, the size of the defects, the perforators that were used, and complications were recorded. RESULTS: During the follow-up period (mean, 14.2 months) of total 21 cases, no major complications such as flap loss occurred. In 2 cases, a minor complication was observed. Temporary flap congestion was seen in 1 case, and was treated with a short period of leech therapy, and the other case was partial necrosis on the flap margin, which was cured with minimal debridement and conservative treatment. No major problems have occurred, especially on the de-epithelized part of the flap and in the occupied space. CONCLUSIONS: With performing careful procedure, a perforator-based island flap with partial de-epithelization can be a useful option for the surgical treatment of deep cavities. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was retrospectively registered in the institutional review board on human subjects research and the ethics committee, Hanyang University Guri Hospital (Institutional Review Board File No. 2018-01-003-002 https://www.e-irb.com:3443/devlpg/nlpgS200.jsp ).

Use of fetal bovine acellular dermal xenograft with tissue expansion for staged breast reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Staged breast reconstruction with implants and human acellular cadaveric dermis offers advantages of precise expander positioning, higher initial expander fill volumes, and improved outcomes. This study reports breast reconstruction using fetal bovine acellular dermal matrix (FBADM). The high type III collagen content of FBADM may allow for more rapid tissue incorporation and healing. METHODS: A total of 49 breast reconstructions in 28 patients (group A) with FBADM were retrospectively compared with 123 reconstructions in 91 patients operated without FBADM (group B). RESULTS: FBADM sizes ranged from 48 to 100 cm2 (mean size: 70.6 cm2). The mean immediate fill volume in group A was 181.2 ± 148.3 mL and 117.7 ± 66.3 mL in group B (P < 0.001). The duration of drainage was significantly shorter in group A (8.51 ± 3.4 days) as compared with controls (11.07 ± 5.1 days), t-test (P = 0.015). There was no significant difference in the overall complication rate (20.8% in group A, 13.0% in group B). Further subgroup analysis of group A patients with complications and without complications, showed that group with complications had significantly longer drain removal time (9.48 vs. 7.97 days), larger initial fill volumes (238.1 vs. 145.3 mL), and a higher BMI (25.8 vs. 22.6 kg/m2) when compared with the complication-free subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: The use of FBADM in breast reconstruction offers results comparable with that of human acellular dermal matrix as reported in the literature. However, FBADM significantly reduced wound drainage time in our study when compared with patients without FBADM.