The Journal of hand surgery · 2012
Innervated digital artery perforator flap.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ozcanli Haluk, Coskunfirat Osman Koray, Bektas Gamze, Cavit Ali
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To describe a technique for covering defects of the fingertips: the innervated digital artery perforator (IDAP) flap.
METHODS: A total of 17 patients were treated with an IDAP flap. The size of the flaps varied between 2 ×1 cm and 3.5 × 2 cm. Postoperative evaluation of the patients consisted of the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament test, static 2-point discrimination, patient satisfaction, extension loss, and an investigation into complications.
RESULTS: All IDAP flaps survived completely, and no patients required secondary interventions. The mean follow-up period was 7 months (range, 6-10 mo). The Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test results ranged from 3.22 to 3.84. The static 2-point discrimination in the flaps ranged from 2 mm to 4 mm (mean, 3.4 mm) compared with a range of 2 mm to 3 mm (mean, 2.7 mm) on the contralateral hand. There were no joint contractures in the reconstructed fingertips, although 2 patients developed mild hook nail deformity. One patient experienced mild cold intolerance, and 1 patient exhibited mild postoperative hypersensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of the IDAP flap include minimally invasive surgery; a reliable, versatile flap; and the ease of the technique for different-sized fingertip defect reconstructions with few complications. The IDAP flap may be useful in fingertip amputations when the amputated part is not suitable for replantation.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.
METHODS: A total of 17 patients were treated with an IDAP flap. The size of the flaps varied between 2 ×1 cm and 3.5 × 2 cm. Postoperative evaluation of the patients consisted of the Semmes-Weinstein Monofilament test, static 2-point discrimination, patient satisfaction, extension loss, and an investigation into complications.
RESULTS: All IDAP flaps survived completely, and no patients required secondary interventions. The mean follow-up period was 7 months (range, 6-10 mo). The Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test results ranged from 3.22 to 3.84. The static 2-point discrimination in the flaps ranged from 2 mm to 4 mm (mean, 3.4 mm) compared with a range of 2 mm to 3 mm (mean, 2.7 mm) on the contralateral hand. There were no joint contractures in the reconstructed fingertips, although 2 patients developed mild hook nail deformity. One patient experienced mild cold intolerance, and 1 patient exhibited mild postoperative hypersensitivity.
CONCLUSIONS: The advantages of the IDAP flap include minimally invasive surgery; a reliable, versatile flap; and the ease of the technique for different-sized fingertip defect reconstructions with few complications. The IDAP flap may be useful in fingertip amputations when the amputated part is not suitable for replantation.
TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic IV.