Cargando…

Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review

Performing a greater number of free flap procedures inevitably results in an increase in the number of cases that experience free flap failure. In cases that require a second free flap after the failure of the first, recipient vessel selection becomes difficult. Furthermore, recipient vessel selecti...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seo, Sang Won, Kim, Kyu Nam, Ha, Won, Yoon, Chi Sun
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5805458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29384886
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009819
_version_ 1783298980218667008
author Seo, Sang Won
Kim, Kyu Nam
Ha, Won
Yoon, Chi Sun
author_facet Seo, Sang Won
Kim, Kyu Nam
Ha, Won
Yoon, Chi Sun
author_sort Seo, Sang Won
collection PubMed
description Performing a greater number of free flap procedures inevitably results in an increase in the number of cases that experience free flap failure. In cases that require a second free flap after the failure of the first, recipient vessel selection becomes difficult. Furthermore, recipient vessel selection can be complicated if the vessel is deep in the recipient site, or if there is an increased risk of vessel damage during the dissection. Thus, we present our experience where a subfascial vessel beneath the deep fascia was used as a recipient vessel for a second free flap in lower extremity reconstruction due to total or partial first flap failure. Between January 2010 and April 2015, 5 patients underwent second free flap reconstruction using a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel. The flaps were anastomosed in a perforator-to-perforator manner, using the supermicrosurgery technique. We measured the sizes of the flaps, which varied from 5 × 3 to 15 × 8 cm, and the recipient subfascial vessel diameters. The mean time for the dissection of the recipient perforator was 45 minutes. All the flaps exhibited full survival, although a partial loss of the skin graft at the flap donor site was observed in 1 patient; this defect healed with conservative management. We recommend using a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel for both first and second free flaps, especially if access to the major vessel is risky or challenging.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5805458
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Wolters Kluwer Health
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58054582018-02-20 Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review Seo, Sang Won Kim, Kyu Nam Ha, Won Yoon, Chi Sun Medicine (Baltimore) 7100 Performing a greater number of free flap procedures inevitably results in an increase in the number of cases that experience free flap failure. In cases that require a second free flap after the failure of the first, recipient vessel selection becomes difficult. Furthermore, recipient vessel selection can be complicated if the vessel is deep in the recipient site, or if there is an increased risk of vessel damage during the dissection. Thus, we present our experience where a subfascial vessel beneath the deep fascia was used as a recipient vessel for a second free flap in lower extremity reconstruction due to total or partial first flap failure. Between January 2010 and April 2015, 5 patients underwent second free flap reconstruction using a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel. The flaps were anastomosed in a perforator-to-perforator manner, using the supermicrosurgery technique. We measured the sizes of the flaps, which varied from 5 × 3 to 15 × 8 cm, and the recipient subfascial vessel diameters. The mean time for the dissection of the recipient perforator was 45 minutes. All the flaps exhibited full survival, although a partial loss of the skin graft at the flap donor site was observed in 1 patient; this defect healed with conservative management. We recommend using a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel for both first and second free flaps, especially if access to the major vessel is risky or challenging. Wolters Kluwer Health 2018-02-02 /pmc/articles/PMC5805458/ /pubmed/29384886 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009819 Text en Copyright © 2018 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0 This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0 (CCBY), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
spellingShingle 7100
Seo, Sang Won
Kim, Kyu Nam
Ha, Won
Yoon, Chi Sun
Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title_full Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title_fullStr Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title_full_unstemmed Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title_short Validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: A retrospective clinical review
title_sort validity of the use of a subfascial vessel as the recipient vessel in a second free flap transfer: a retrospective clinical review
topic 7100
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5805458/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29384886
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000009819
work_keys_str_mv AT seosangwon validityoftheuseofasubfascialvesselastherecipientvesselinasecondfreeflaptransferaretrospectiveclinicalreview
AT kimkyunam validityoftheuseofasubfascialvesselastherecipientvesselinasecondfreeflaptransferaretrospectiveclinicalreview
AT hawon validityoftheuseofasubfascialvesselastherecipientvesselinasecondfreeflaptransferaretrospectiveclinicalreview
AT yoonchisun validityoftheuseofasubfascialvesselastherecipientvesselinasecondfreeflaptransferaretrospectiveclinicalreview