Abstract
Objective The objective of the present study was to prospectively compare the sural and propeller flaps for soft-tissues coverage of the lower extremity. The following variables were evaluated: incidence of complete or partial flap loss and donor area morbidity (primary closure versus skin graft). Methods Prospective and randomized analysis of data collected from all patients presenting with soft tissue defects of the lower third of the leg and heel treated with reverse sural or propeller flaps. Results Twenty-four patients aged between 4 and 60 years old were evaluated between 2011 and 2017. Complete coverage was obtained in 22 of the 24 patients (91.6%). Two flaps failed (8.4%). The sural flap, being the most popular option, continues to represent a safe and versatile alternative for skin defects of the lower third of the leg and heel region. Likewise, the propeller flap was a comparable option to treat these challenging defects. Conclusion Sural and propeller flaps are good options for soft tissues coverage of the lower extremity, with low complication rates (partial or total flap loss).