Cargando…

Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background  The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective par...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar, Sahu, Ranjit Kumar, Acharya, Sudeshna, Goel, Akhil Dhanesh, Midya, Manojit, Kotu, Suresh
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2023
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10332906/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37435333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1760092
_version_ 1785070537343500288
author Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar
Sahu, Ranjit Kumar
Acharya, Sudeshna
Goel, Akhil Dhanesh
Midya, Manojit
Kotu, Suresh
author_facet Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar
Sahu, Ranjit Kumar
Acharya, Sudeshna
Goel, Akhil Dhanesh
Midya, Manojit
Kotu, Suresh
author_sort Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar
collection PubMed
description Background  The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective parameters for the sensory recovery, stiffness, cold intolerance, cosmetic outcome, and other complications in the donor fingers, reported in the previous studies, are systematically evaluated. Methods  This systematic review is reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol and was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020213721). Literature search was done using “cross-finger,” “heterodigital,” “donor finger,” and “transdigital” words. Data regarding demography, patients' number and age, follow-up duration and outcomes of donor finger, including 2-point discrimination, range of motion (ROM), cold intolerance, questionnaires, etc. were extracted from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL and risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results  Out of the total 16 included studies, 279 patients were objectively evaluated for donor finger morbidity. Middle finger was most frequently used as donor. Static two-point discrimination seemed to be impaired in donor finger in comparison to contralateral finger. Meta-analysis of ROM suggested that statistically there is no significant difference in ROM of interphalangeal joints in donor and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference: −12.10; 95% confidence interval: −28.59, 4.39; I2 = 81%, n  = 6 studies). One-third of donor fingers had cold intolerance. Conclusion  There is no significant effect on ROM of donor finger. However, the impairment that seems to be in sensory recovery and aesthetic outcomes needs to be further evaluated objectively.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10332906
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103329062023-07-11 Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar Sahu, Ranjit Kumar Acharya, Sudeshna Goel, Akhil Dhanesh Midya, Manojit Kotu, Suresh Indian J Plast Surg Background  The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective parameters for the sensory recovery, stiffness, cold intolerance, cosmetic outcome, and other complications in the donor fingers, reported in the previous studies, are systematically evaluated. Methods  This systematic review is reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol and was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020213721). Literature search was done using “cross-finger,” “heterodigital,” “donor finger,” and “transdigital” words. Data regarding demography, patients' number and age, follow-up duration and outcomes of donor finger, including 2-point discrimination, range of motion (ROM), cold intolerance, questionnaires, etc. were extracted from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL and risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results  Out of the total 16 included studies, 279 patients were objectively evaluated for donor finger morbidity. Middle finger was most frequently used as donor. Static two-point discrimination seemed to be impaired in donor finger in comparison to contralateral finger. Meta-analysis of ROM suggested that statistically there is no significant difference in ROM of interphalangeal joints in donor and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference: −12.10; 95% confidence interval: −28.59, 4.39; I2 = 81%, n  = 6 studies). One-third of donor fingers had cold intolerance. Conclusion  There is no significant effect on ROM of donor finger. However, the impairment that seems to be in sensory recovery and aesthetic outcomes needs to be further evaluated objectively. Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. 2023-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC10332906/ /pubmed/37435333 http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1760092 Text en Association of Plastic Surgeons of India. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. ( https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ ) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives License, which permits unrestricted reproduction and distribution, for non-commercial purposes only; and use and reproduction, but not distribution, of adapted material for non-commercial purposes only, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Chakraborty, Sourabh Shankar
Sahu, Ranjit Kumar
Acharya, Sudeshna
Goel, Akhil Dhanesh
Midya, Manojit
Kotu, Suresh
Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_fullStr Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_full_unstemmed Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_short Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
title_sort donor finger morbidity in cross-finger flap: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10332906/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37435333
http://dx.doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1760092
work_keys_str_mv AT chakrabortysourabhshankar donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT sahuranjitkumar donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT acharyasudeshna donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT goelakhildhanesh donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT midyamanojit donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT kotusuresh donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis