Abstract
BACKGROUND: Soft tissue defects over the foot and ankle region are most challenging in reconstructive surgery. Sural artery and supramalleolar flaps have been commonly used for the reconstruction of non-weight-bearing surfaces of the foot. This article aimed to evaluate the long-term outcome comparisons between a sural artery and Supramalleolar flap in the reconstruction of extensive defects of foot and ankle only. METHODS: Between 1996 and 2020, a retrospective analysis of 53 fasciocutaneous flaps (27 sural and 26 Supramalleolar) used for reconstruction of soft tissue defects of foot and ankle were reviewed in this study. The parameters included were demographics data, causes, site and size of the defect, flap size, hospital stay, complications, and outcomes in a pre-structured proforma. The clinical outcome was assessed by a Self-Designed Tool based on flap survival, coverage of defect, weight-bearing status, functional activities of daily living, and cosmetic appearance. Data were analyzed through SPSS version 25. RESULTS: Among 53 flaps, the major cause of the defect was Trauma (60.4%). The maximum flap size harvested was 25*10 for sural and 20*8 cm for supramalleolar. Complications were seen in 8 (15%) cases in both flaps. Flap tip necrosis and venous congestion were seen in 4 cases. 2 each in Supramalleolar whereas 1 partial necrosis, 1 venous congestion, and 2 infections were seen in the sural artery flap. The flap survival rate in both flaps was 96.2%. Based on the self-designed Tool, flaps were graded Excellent in 43, Good in 8, and Fair in 2 cases. There was no case of Poor in both flaps. CONCLUSION: Compared with the sural artery flap, the lateral supramalleolar flap demonstrated higher rates of functional outcomes although flap tip necrosis was higher in Supramalleolar.