Dataset Information

Pedicled sural flaps versus free anterolateral thigh flaps in reconstruction of dorsal foot and ankle defects in children: a systematic review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This systematic review compared free anterolateral thigh (ALT) flaps versus pedicled distally based sural artery (DBSA) flaps for reconstruction of soft tissue defects of dorsal foot and ankle in children.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed to identify cases where an ALT or DBSA was used to reconstruct the dorsal foot in children. A total of 19 articles were included in the systematic review.

Results

Eighty-three patients underwent an ALT reconstruction and 138 patients underwent a DBSA reconstruction. Patients who had a DBSA were more likely to require grafting of the donor site (P<0.001). The size of ALT flaps was significantly larger than DBSA flaps (P=0.002). Subsequent flap thinning was required in 30% of patients after ALT and 12% of patients after DBSA reconstruction (P<0.001). Complications occurred in 11.6% of DBSA and 8.4% of ALT flaps (8.4%).

Conclusions

Both flaps are valid options in reconstructing pediatric foot and ankle defects. Each flap has advantages and disadvantages as discussed in this review article. In general for larger defects, an ALT flap was used. Flap choice should be based on the size of the defect.

SUBMITTER: Beecher SM

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8342255 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Microsurgical scalp reconstruction is indicated in patients with large scalp defects. The aim of this study was to compare the outcomes of scalp reconstruction in oncologic patients reconstructed with latissimus dorsi (LD), anterolateral thigh (ALT), and omental (OM) free flaps. Thirty oncologic patients underwent scalp reconstruction with LD (10), ALT (11), and OM (9) flaps. The length of the vascular pedicle, the operation time, the possibility of a two-team approach, the length of hospital stays, the complications, and the aesthetic results were evaluated. The OM flap was the flap with the shortest vascular pedicle length with a mean of 6.26 ± 0.16 cm, compared to the LD flap, which was 12.34 ± 0.55 cm and the ALT flap with 13.20 ± 0.26 cm (p < 0.05). The average time of surgery was 6.6 ± 0.14 h in patients reconstructed with OM, compared to the LD flap, which was 8.91 ± 0.32 h and the ALT flap with 7.53 ± 0.22 h (p < 0.05). A two-team approach was performed in all patients for OM flaps and ALT flaps, but only in two patients reconstructed with the LD flap (p < 0.001). In patients reconstructed with the OM flap, a very satisfactory or satisfactory result was reported in seven patients (77.8%). Eight patients reported a very unsatisfactory or unsatisfactory result with LD flap (80%) and 10 patients with ALT flap (90.9%) (p = 0.002). The mean hospital stay after surgery was not statistically significant (p > 0.05). As for complications, two patients reconstructed with OM flap, five LT flaps, and two ALT flaps developed complications, not statistically significant (p = 0.235). Omental flap, latissimus dorsi flap, and anterolateral thigh flap fulfill most of the characteristics for complex scalp reconstruction. The decision on which flap to use should be based on clinical aspects of the patients taking into account that the three flaps show similar rates of complications and length of hospital stay. Regarding the aesthetic outcome, OM flap or LD flap should be considered for reconstruction of extensive scalp defects.