Soft Tissue Reconstruction Around the Ankle with Peroneal and Posterior Tibial Artery Perforator Flaps: A Randomized Controlled Trial | ||||
The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery | ||||
Article 8, Volume 46, Issue 3, July 2022, Page 257-264 PDF (12.49 MB) | ||||
DOI: 10.21608/ejprs.2022.254718 | ||||
View on SCiNiTO | ||||
Authors | ||||
Mahmoud K. Elshewy 1; Mohamed Radwan ElHadidy1; Sameh Abdel Aziz2; Mohamed E.D. Abdel Shaheed3; Ahmed E. Zayed1 | ||||
1The Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University | ||||
2The Department of General Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University | ||||
3The Departments of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery* and General Surgery**, Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University | ||||
Abstract | ||||
Background: Soft tissue defects of the ankle region continue to present a complex reconstructive challenge to the reconstructive surgeon. Many flaps have been used to rebuild these defects, and each flap has its own merits and drawbacks. This randomized controlled study was designed to compare between the peroneal artery perforator flap and the posterior tibial artery perforator flap for the ankle region reconstruction and finding out advantages and disadvantages of each flap. Methods: Between July 2020 and April 2022, 22 patients presented with soft tissue defects around the ankle with exposed vital structures as bones and tendons, who were categorized into two equal groups group 1: The peroneal artery perforator flap group (11 patients) and group 2: The posterior tibial artery perforator flap group (11 patients). Post-operative complications were the primary comparative parameters. Results: In total 22 patients with tissue defects around the ankle region were operated with either the peroneal artery perforator flap and the posterior tibial artery perforator flap < br />11 cases in each group, the post-operative flap complications as total flap loss and distal flap necrosis were (18.2%), (27.3%) receptively in the peroneal group and (27.3%), (36.4%) in the posterior tibial group and the mean time of flap elevation was longer in the posterior tibial group (106.82min) compared to the peroneal group with (64.55min). Conclusion: The peroneal artery perforator flap is better elevated as pedicled while the posterior tibial artery perforator flap better elevated as propeller. | ||||
Keywords | ||||
Posterior tibial flap; Peroneal flap; Perforator flap; Ankle reconstruction | ||||
References | ||||
1- Luo Z., Lv G., Wei J., Ni J., Liu L., Peng P. and Dong Z.: Comparison between distally based peroneal and posterior tibial artery perforator-plus fasciocutaneous flap for reconstruction of the lower extremity. Burns, 46 (1): 225- 33, 2020. 2- Hifny M.A., Tohamy A.M., Rabie O. and Ali A.A.: Propeller perforator flaps for coverage of soft tissue defects in the middle and distal lower extremities. In Annales de Chirurgie Plastique Esthétique, 65 (1): 54-60, 2020. 3- Donski P.K. and Fogdestam I.: Distally based fasciocutaneous flap from the sural region. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 17 (3): 191-6, 1983. 4- Reis J. and Soares R.: A new distally based fasciocutaneous flap of the leg. British Journal of Plastic Surgery, 39 (3): 338-40, 1986. 5- Lese I., Grobbelaar A.O., Sabau D., Georgescu A.V., Constantinescu M.A. and Olariu R.: The Propeller Flap for Traumatic Distal Lower-Limb Reconstruction Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery, 00: 1-9, 2019. 6- Abdelshaheed M.E.: Classification and clinical evaluation of" spare parts" procedures in mutilating hand injuries. Hand Surgery and Rehabilitation, 40 (1): 75-80, 2021. 7- Ring A., Kirchhoff P., Goertz O., Behr B., Daigeler A., Lehnhardt M. and Harati K.: Reconstruction of soft-tissue defects at the foot and ankle after oncological resection. Frontiers in Surgery, 8 (3): 15, 2016. 8- Lecours C., Saint-Cyr M., Wong C., Bernier C., Mailhot E., Tardif M. and Chollet A.: Freestyle pedicle perforator flaps: Clinical results and vascular anatomy. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 126 (5): 1589-603, 2010. 9- Zhang W., Li X. and Li X.: A systematic review and metaanalysis of perforator flaps in plantar defects: Risk analysis of complications. International Wound Journal, 4: 525- 35, 2021. 10- Dong K.X., Xu Y.Q., Fan X.Y., Xu L.J., Su X.X., Long H., Xu L.Q. and He X.Q.: Perforator pedicled propeller flaps for soft tissue coverage of lower leg and foot defects. Orthopaedic Surgery, 6 (1): 42-6, 2014. 11- Demiri E., Foroglou P., Dionyssiou D., Antoniou A., Kakas P., Pavlidis L. and Lazaridis L.: Our experience with the lateral supramalleolar island flap for reconstruction of the distal leg and foot: a review of 20 cases. Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, 40 (2): 106-10, 2006. 12- Tharayil J. and Patil R.K.: Reverse peroneal artery flap for large defects of ankle and foot: A reliable reconstructive technique. Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery, 45 (1): 45, 2012. 13- Cheng L., Yang X., Chen T. and Li Z.: Peroneal artery perforator flap for the treatment of chronic lower extremity wounds. Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research, 12 (1): 1-7, 2017. 14- Vaienti L., Calori G.M., Leone F., Brioschi M., Parodi P.C. and Marchesi A.: Posterior tibial artery perforator flaps for coverage of Achilles region defects. Injury, 45 (1): 33-7, 2014. 15- Koshima I., Nanba Y., Tsutsui T., Takahashi Y. and Itoh S.: Perforator flaps in lower extremity reconstruction. Handchirurgie· Mikrochirurgie· Plastische Chirurgie., 34 (04): 251-6,2002. 16- Rad A.N., Singh N.K. and Rosson G.D.: Peroneal artery perforator-based propeller flap reconstruction of the lateral distal lower extremity after tumor extirpation: Case report and literature review. Microsurgery, 28 (8): 663-70, 2008. 17- Lu T.C., Lin C.H., Lin C.H., Lin Y.T., Chen R.F. and Wei F.C.: Versatility of the pedicled peroneal artery perforator 264 Vol. 46, No. 3 / Soft Tissue Reconstruction Around the Ankle flaps for soft-tissue coverage of the lower leg and foot defects. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 64 (3): 386-93, 2011. 18- Wong J.K., Deek N., Hsu C.C., Chen H.Y., Lin C.H. and Lin C.H.: Versatility and “flap efficiency” of pedicled perforator flaps in lower extremity reconstruction. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery, 70 (1): 67-77, 2017. 19- Shayan R., Rozen W.M., Bernard S., Corlett R.J., Ashton M.W. and Taylor G.I.: Perforator dilatation induced by body weight gain is not reversed by subsequent weight loss: Implications for perforator flaps. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 122 (6): 1765-72, 2008. 20- Luo Z., Lv G., Wei J., Ni J., Liu L., Peng P. and Dong Z.: Comparison between distally based peroneal and posterior tibial artery perforator-plus fasciocutaneous flap for reconstruction of the lower extremity. Burns, 46 (1): 225- 33, 2020. 21- Koh K., Goh T.L., Song C.T., Suh H.S., Rovito P.V., Hong J.P. and Hallock G.G.: Free versus pedicled perforator flaps for lower extremity reconstruction: A multicenter comparison of institutional practices and outcomes. Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery, 34 (08): 572-80, 2018 | ||||
Statistics Article View: 206 PDF Download: 309 |
||||