We have located links that may give you full text access.
The Use of Pedicled Perforator Flaps in Chest Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Outcomes and Reliability.
Annals of Plastic Surgery 2018 October
BACKGROUND: In recent years, pedicled perforator flaps have revolutionized plastic surgery by reducing donor site morbidity and ensuring larger and deeper reconstructions with local pedicled cutaneous flaps. The aim of the study was to make a systematic review of perforator pedicled propeller flaps (PPPFs) in chest reconstruction.
METHODS: Pubmed and Cochrane databases were searched from 1989 to October 2016 for articles describing the use of PPPFs in chest reconstruction. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta analyses statement was used in the selection process. The review was registered on international prospective register of systematic reviews. Furthermore, operative technique, indications and complications were searched.
RESULTS: Twenty-four articles were selected (174 patients and 182 flaps). Oncological surgery was the first etiology (34.5%), followed by infections (11.5%), chest keloid scars (6.23%), malformations (4.6%), burns (3.4%), chronic ulcers (2.3%), Verneuil disease (1.8%), and acute wounds (1.8%). The arc of rotation was between 90° and 120° in 24.2%. The mean surface of flaps was 127.45 ± 123.11 cm. Dissection was subfascial in 78.5% of the cases. Complications were found in 9.9% of patients and included mainly wound dehiscence (4.4%) and hematoma/seroma (2.2%). One case of total necrosis (0.5%) and 2 cases of partial necrosis (1.1%) were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The possibility of numerous pedicles makes it possible for PPPFs to offset most areas of wall chest defects. Furthermore, this surgical technique is reliable and reproducible, with lower donor site morbidity than that in the case of muscular flaps, which are classically used in this location.
METHODS: Pubmed and Cochrane databases were searched from 1989 to October 2016 for articles describing the use of PPPFs in chest reconstruction. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta analyses statement was used in the selection process. The review was registered on international prospective register of systematic reviews. Furthermore, operative technique, indications and complications were searched.
RESULTS: Twenty-four articles were selected (174 patients and 182 flaps). Oncological surgery was the first etiology (34.5%), followed by infections (11.5%), chest keloid scars (6.23%), malformations (4.6%), burns (3.4%), chronic ulcers (2.3%), Verneuil disease (1.8%), and acute wounds (1.8%). The arc of rotation was between 90° and 120° in 24.2%. The mean surface of flaps was 127.45 ± 123.11 cm. Dissection was subfascial in 78.5% of the cases. Complications were found in 9.9% of patients and included mainly wound dehiscence (4.4%) and hematoma/seroma (2.2%). One case of total necrosis (0.5%) and 2 cases of partial necrosis (1.1%) were found.
CONCLUSIONS: The possibility of numerous pedicles makes it possible for PPPFs to offset most areas of wall chest defects. Furthermore, this surgical technique is reliable and reproducible, with lower donor site morbidity than that in the case of muscular flaps, which are classically used in this location.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
Perioperative echocardiographic strain analysis: what anesthesiologists should know.Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia 2024 April 11
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app