Journals / Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica / 2006 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4

The frequency of vascular variations and complications with the use of the posterior interosseous artery flap

Posterior interosseöz arter flebi kullanımında damarsal varyasyon ve komplikasyonların sıklığı

Pages
307–310
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

However, the frequency of anatomic variations and vascular complications is higher compared to other reverse pedicled flaps.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objectives: We evaluated vascular problems in patients who were planned to receive posterior interosseous artery (PIA) flap for soft tissue defects in the dorsal hand, thumb, and the first web.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Methods: The study included 25 male patients (mean age 27 years; range 12 to 54 years) in whom reconstruction was planned with the use of the reverse PIA flap.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:However, the frequency of anatomic variations and vascular complications is higher compared to other reverse pedicled flaps.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:El yaralanmaları · Cerrahi flepler · Rekonstrüktif cerrahi işlemler

Abstract

Objectives: We evaluated vascular problems in patients who were planned to receive posterior interosseous artery (PIA) flap for soft tissue defects in the dorsal hand, thumb, and the first web. Methods: The study included 25 male patients (mean age 27 years; range 12 to 54 years) in whom reconstruction was planned with the use of the reverse PIA flap. The defects were in the following localizations: the dorsal hand (n=15), the first web (n=5), hypothenar region (n=3), and the palmar aspect of the wrist (n=2). The frequency of anatomic variations and complications were evaluated. Results: The use of the PIA flap was cancelled in one patient (4%) due to an anatomic variation of the PIA in the forearm. The vascular pedicle of the flap was removed because of insufficient arterial perfusion due to the absence of distal carpal anastomosis and the donor tissue was used as a free flap in two patients (8.3%). The remaining 22 patients who received pedicled flaps were followed-up for a mean of 3.2 months (range 1.5 to 6.5 months), during which six patients (27.3%) developed venous insufficiency. A superficial vein anastomosis was performed in five patients within the first 24 hours, which resulted in complete improvement. One patient was not available for venous anastomosis and developed flap necrosis. The occurrence of venous insufficiency was not correlated with the timing of flap surgery, the size of the flap, and the placement of the flap pedicle (p>0.05). Conclusion: The use of the reverse PIA flap is appropriate for soft tissue defects in the dorsal hand, thumb, and the first web. However, the frequency of anatomic variations and vascular complications is higher compared to other reverse pedicled flaps.

Özet

Amaç: Elin dorsal yüzü, başparmak ve birinci veb yumuşak doku kayıplarında posterior interosseöz arter (PİA) flebi uygulaması planlanan olgularda karşılaşılan vasküler sorunlar değerlendirildi. Çalışma planı: Çalışmaya yumuşak doku defektleri için ters akımlı PİA flebi ile rekonstrüksiyon planlanan 25 erkek hasta (ort. yaş 27; dağılım 12-54) alındı. Defekt yerleri 15 olguda el dorsali, beşinde birinci veb, üçünde hipotenar bölge, ikisinde el bileği palmarı idi. Olgularda rastlanan anatomik varyasyonların sıklığı ve karşılaşılan komplikasyonlar incelendi. Sonuçlar: Bir olguda (%4) önkol ortasında PİA’nın anatomik varyasyonuna rastlanması nedeniyle uygulamadan vazgeçildi. İki olguda (%8.3) distal karpal anastomoz yokluğu nedeniyle flepte yeterli arteryel perfüzyon oluşmadığı için pediküller çıkarıldı ve girişim serbest flep uygulamasına dönüştürüldü. Pediküllü flep uygulanan 22 hastanın ortalama takip süresi 3.2 ay (dağılım 1.5-6.5 ay) idi. Bu olguların altısında (%27.3) ameliyat sonrası dönemde venöz yetmezlik gelişti. Bu altı flebin beşine ilk 24 saat içinde yüzeyel ven anastomozu yapıldı ve bunların hepsi sorunsuz iyileşti. Ven anastomozu yapılmayan bir flepte (%4.6) nekroz gelişti. Flep uygulama zamanı, flep boyutu ve flep pedikül geçiş şekli ile venöz yetmezlik gelişimi arasında anlamlı ilişki bulunmadı (p>0.05). Çıkarımlar: Posterior interosseöz arter flebi, elin dorsal yüzü, başparmak ve birinci veb yumuşak doku kayıplarında kullanımı uygun bir fleptir. Ancak, diğer ters akımlı pediküllü fleplerle kıyaslandığında, anatomik varyasyon ve vasküler komplikasyon oranları daha fazladır.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAL, E., ADEMOĞLU, Y., KAYALAR, M., TOROS, T. (2006). The frequency of vascular variations and complications with the use of the posterior interosseous artery flap. Acta Orthopaedica et Traumatologica Turcica, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 4, 307–310. https://ajindex.com/articles/354161

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (10)

  1. Mazzer N, Barbieri CH, Cortez M. The posterior interosseous forearm island flap for skin defects in the hand and elbow. A prospective study of 51 cases. J Hand Surg [Br] 1996;21:237-43
  2. Ozdemir O, Coskunol E, Alpaydin S. An appropriate alternative for the reconstruction of soft tissue defects in the hand and the wrist: the distally-based island posterior interosseous flap. [Article in Turkish] Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2003; 37:233-6
  3. Angrigiani C, Grilli D, Dominikow D, Zancolli EA. Posterior interosseous reverse forearm flap: experience with 80 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;92:285-93
  4. Buchler U, Frey HP. Retrograde posterior interosseous flap. J Hand Surg [Am] 1991;16:283-92
  5. Ege A, Tuncay I, Ercetin O. Posterior interosseous artery flap in traumatic hand injuries. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 2003;123:323-6
  6. Costa H, Gracia ML, Vranchx J, Cunha C, Conde A, Soutar D. The posterior interosseous flap: a review of 81 clinical cases and 100 anatomical dissections-assessment of its indications in reconstruction of hand defects. Br J Plast Surg 2001;54:28:33
  7. Shibata M, Iwabuchi Y, Kubota S, Matsuzaki H. Comparison of free and reversed pedicled posterior interosseous cutaneous flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;99:791-802
  8. Chen HC, Cheng MH, Schmeeberger AG, Cheng TJ, Wei FC, Tang YB. Posterior interosseous flap and its variations for coverage of hand wounds. J Trauma 1998;45:570-4
  9. Vogelin E, Langer M, Buchler U. How reliable is the posterior interosseous artery island flap? A review of 88 patients. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir 2002;34:190-4. [Abstract] 10. Park JJ, Kim JS, Chung JI. Posterior interosseous free flap: various types. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;100:1186-97
  10. Tonkin MA, Stern H. The posterior interosseous artery free flap. J Hand Surg [Br] 1989;14:215-7.