Dataset Information

Foot Wounds and the Reconstructive Ladder.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Foot soft tissue coverage represents a challenge to reconstructive surgeons due to a lack of donor sites for this specialized skin. This glabrous tethered thick skin is designed to withstand weight bearing stress and is hard to replace. The limited arch of rotation of foot local flaps contributes to further difficulties. In this study, we share our experience in foot soft tissue loss coverage using techniques tailored to each wound presentation.

Methods

This case series presents eight patients with wounds of the plantar and dorsal surfaces of the foot, heel, and ankle. Closure techniques were selected and planned based on wound presentation and comorbidity status.

Results

Patients' mean age at surgery was 61 years. Etiologies of wounds include trauma, frostbite, diabetic ulceration, malignancy, pressure ulcer with osteomyelitis, and necrotizing infection. Coverage techniques included split and full-thickness skin graft, medial plantar arch pinch graft, cultured epithelial autograft, Hyalomatrix wound device, EpiFix tissue matrix, pedicle flap, and free rectus flap. Complete soft tissue coverage was achieved in each case within reasonable postoperative periods, and ambulation was preserved and/or restored.

Conclusions

Foot soft tissue reconstruction is challenging and should be planned carefully due to the required specialized skin replacement. Primary closure should be considered first and attempted if possible. Technique escalation in accordance with the reconstructive ladder should be undertaken based on wound etiology, presentation, amount and nature of tissue loss, available resources, and surgeon experience.

SUBMITTER: Simman R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8710339 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePhysician-oriented outcomes, such as patency and amputation-free survival (AFS), have traditionally been markers of success after lower extremity revascularization. Previous studies have defined clinical success based on a composite of patient-centered outcomes and have shown this outcome to be achieved in less than 50% of patients, far lower than standard physician-oriented outcomes. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical success after lower extremity bypass (LEB) or peripheral vascular intervention (PVI) for tissue loss in diabetic patients treated in a multidisciplinary setting to better understand what factors are associated with success from a patient's perspective.MethodsAll patients presenting to our multidisciplinary diabetic limb preservation service from July 2012 to January 2020 were enrolled in a prospective database. Patients who underwent either LEB or PVI for ulcer or gangrene were included in the analysis. Clinical success was defined as the composite outcome of secondary patency to the point of wound healing, limb salvage for 1 year, maintenance of ambulatory status for 1 year, and survival for 6 months. Secondary outcomes included 1-year wound healing, patency, and AFS.ResultsA total of 134 revascularizations were performed in 131 patients, including 91 (68%) PVI and 43 (32%) LEB. Patients were more frequently male (64%) and black (61%), and 16% were dialysis-dependent. All patients had tissue loss (53% ulcer, 47% gangrene). There were 5 (3.7%) wound, ischemia, and foot infection stage 1, 6 (6.0%) stage 2, 29 (22%) stage 3, and 92 (69%) stage 4 limbs at the time of revascularization. Overall, 76.9% of patients preserved secondary patency to the point of wound healing, 92.5% had limb salvage for 1 year, 90.3% had maintenance of ambulatory status for 1 year, and 96.3% survived for 6 months. The clinical success composite outcome was achieved in 71.6% of patients and was not statistically different between those undergoing PVI vs LEB (69.2% vs 76.7%, P = .37). Secondary patency, limb salvage, and AFS at 1 year were 80.8% ± 3.6%, 91.8% ± 2.3%, and 83.3% ± 3.1%, respectively. Wound healing at 1 year was 84.3% ± 3.4%. The only covariate associated with clinical failure on multivariable analysis was increased age (odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-0.99; P = .008).ConclusionsAmong diabetic patients presenting with tissue loss, the composite outcome of patient-centered clinical success is lower than traditional physician-centered outcomes after lower extremity revascularization, mostly due to low rates of secondary patency to the point of wound healing. In the current study, clinical failure was only associated with older age and was no different after PVI compared with LEB.