Cargando…
Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect
There are different approaches for reconstruction of little finger and dorsal hand defects. The ulnar parametacarpal flap, first introduced by Backhach et al in 1995, is considered a good option for reconstructing such defects. In this study, we elevated this flap on one perforator and applied it as...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8865512/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35223340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004130 |
_version_ | 1784655648197181440 |
---|---|
author | Estawrow, Mina A. Gad, Ahmed M. |
author_facet | Estawrow, Mina A. Gad, Ahmed M. |
author_sort | Estawrow, Mina A. |
collection | PubMed |
description | There are different approaches for reconstruction of little finger and dorsal hand defects. The ulnar parametacarpal flap, first introduced by Backhach et al in 1995, is considered a good option for reconstructing such defects. In this study, we elevated this flap on one perforator and applied it as a propeller flap. We then discussed the reliability of this flap and which perforator (the proximal or the distal one) is more reliable. METHODS: This study was carried out on 20 patients with different little finger and dorsal hand defects between June 2017 and March 2019. All defects were covered by perforator-based ulnar parametacarpal flaps. Ten flaps were based on the proximal perforator, whereas the other 10 were based on the distal perforator. RESULTS: With a period of follow-up ranging from 6 months to 1 year, all flaps that were raised on the proximal perforator survived completely, whereas two of 10 flaps raised on the distal perforator showed venous congestion and also one flap showed partial necrosis of the distal one-third due to ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: The perforator based ulnar parametacarpal flap is a reliable option for reconstruction of little finger and dorsal hand defects. It is more reliable when it is raised on the proximal perforator rather than on the distal one. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8865512 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-88655122022-02-24 Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect Estawrow, Mina A. Gad, Ahmed M. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Hand There are different approaches for reconstruction of little finger and dorsal hand defects. The ulnar parametacarpal flap, first introduced by Backhach et al in 1995, is considered a good option for reconstructing such defects. In this study, we elevated this flap on one perforator and applied it as a propeller flap. We then discussed the reliability of this flap and which perforator (the proximal or the distal one) is more reliable. METHODS: This study was carried out on 20 patients with different little finger and dorsal hand defects between June 2017 and March 2019. All defects were covered by perforator-based ulnar parametacarpal flaps. Ten flaps were based on the proximal perforator, whereas the other 10 were based on the distal perforator. RESULTS: With a period of follow-up ranging from 6 months to 1 year, all flaps that were raised on the proximal perforator survived completely, whereas two of 10 flaps raised on the distal perforator showed venous congestion and also one flap showed partial necrosis of the distal one-third due to ischemia. CONCLUSIONS: The perforator based ulnar parametacarpal flap is a reliable option for reconstruction of little finger and dorsal hand defects. It is more reliable when it is raised on the proximal perforator rather than on the distal one. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2022-02-22 /pmc/articles/PMC8865512/ /pubmed/35223340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004130 Text en Copyright © 2022 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Hand Estawrow, Mina A. Gad, Ahmed M. Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title | Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title_full | Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title_fullStr | Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title_full_unstemmed | Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title_short | Reliability of Perforator-based UPM Flap for Coverage of Little Finger and Dorsal Hand Defect |
title_sort | reliability of perforator-based upm flap for coverage of little finger and dorsal hand defect |
topic | Hand |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8865512/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35223340 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004130 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT estawrowminaa reliabilityofperforatorbasedupmflapforcoverageoflittlefingeranddorsalhanddefect AT gadahmedm reliabilityofperforatorbasedupmflapforcoverageoflittlefingeranddorsalhanddefect |