Free Parascapular Flap Versus Free Superficial Circumflex Iliac Artery Perforator Flaps in Upper Limb Reconstruction

上肢重建中游离肩胛旁皮瓣与游离旋髂浅动脉穿支皮瓣的比较

阅读:1

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Upper limb tissue reconstruction poses significant challenges in achieving stable coverage and functional restoration. This study evaluated the efficacy of the free parascapular (PS) flap and the free superficial circumflex iliac artery perforator (SCIP) flap for upper extremity defect reconstruction, comparing their unique characteristics, aesthetic outcomes, and complications. METHODS: A prospective clinical trial was conducted at a tertiary care hospital between February 2023 and February 2025, involving 20 patients who were divided into 2 groups: 10 received PS flaps (group A) and 10 received SCIP flaps (group B). Data on flap characteristics, operative time, donor-site morbidity, and aesthetic outcomes were collected and analyzed. RESULTS: Group A flaps exhibited significantly greater flap lengths (18.4 ± 6.9 versus 9.2 ± 3.2 cm), pedicle lengths (8.6 ± 1.6 versus 5.64 ± 0.82 cm), and pedicle diameters (3.19 ± 1.02 versus 0.77 ± 0.2 mm) (P < 0.001). SCIP flaps offered logistical advantages, including supine positioning and consistent use of a 2-team approach (100% versus 50%, P = 0.03), with shorter operative times (334.3 ± 40.03 versus 413.6 ± 85.3 min, P = 0.01). Aesthetic outcomes were comparable. Complications were infrequent, with 1 total flap loss in group A and partial necrosis in group B. CONCLUSIONS: Both PS and SCIP flaps are reliable options for upper limb reconstruction. PS flaps offer larger pedicle dimensions, whereas SCIP flaps enable shorter operative times and concealed donor sites.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。