Journal of reconstructive microsurgery · 2018
Lower Extremity Limb Salvage with Cross Leg Pedicle Flap, Cross Leg Free Flap, and Cross Leg Vascular Cable Bridge Flap.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Manrique Oscar J, Bishop Sarah N, Ciudad Pedro, Adabi Kian, Martinez-Jorge Jorys, Moran Steven L, Huang Tony, Vijayasekaran Aparna, Chen Shih-Heng, Chen Hung-Chi
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Lower extremity salvage following significant soft tissue loss can be complicated by lack of recipient vessel for free tissue transfer. We describe our experience in lower limb salvage for patients with no recipient vessels with the use of pedicle, free and cable bridge flaps.
METHODS: A retrospective review from 1985 to 2017 of patients undergoing lower limb salvage using a contralateral pedicle cross leg (PCL) flaps, free cross leg (FCL) flaps, or free cable bridge (FCB) flaps was conducted. Demographics, etiology of the reconstruction, type of flap used, donor-site vessels, defect size, operating time, time of pedicle division, length of hospital stay, time to ambulation, and complications were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 53 patients (48 males and 5 females) with an average age of 35 years (range, 29-38 years) were identified. The etiology for the reconstruction was trauma in 52 patients and oncological resection in 1 patient. There were 18 PCL, 25 FCL, and 10 FCB completed. The recipient vessels for all flaps were the posterior tibial artery and vein. The average operating room times for PCL, FCL, and FCB flaps were 4, 9, and 10 hours, respectively. The average length of hospital stay was 5 weeks and average time to ambulation was 4 weeks. The average follow-up time was 7.5 years (range, 3-12 years). Complications encountered were hematoma (six), prolonged pain (six), total flap loss (two), reoperation (five), and infection (four). Limb salvage rates were 96.2%.
CONCLUSION: When ipsilateral limb vessels are not available, and other reconstructive options have been exhausted, cross leg flaps can be a viable option for limb salvage in the setting of extensive defects.
METHODS: A retrospective review from 1985 to 2017 of patients undergoing lower limb salvage using a contralateral pedicle cross leg (PCL) flaps, free cross leg (FCL) flaps, or free cable bridge (FCB) flaps was conducted. Demographics, etiology of the reconstruction, type of flap used, donor-site vessels, defect size, operating time, time of pedicle division, length of hospital stay, time to ambulation, and complications were analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of 53 patients (48 males and 5 females) with an average age of 35 years (range, 29-38 years) were identified. The etiology for the reconstruction was trauma in 52 patients and oncological resection in 1 patient. There were 18 PCL, 25 FCL, and 10 FCB completed. The recipient vessels for all flaps were the posterior tibial artery and vein. The average operating room times for PCL, FCL, and FCB flaps were 4, 9, and 10 hours, respectively. The average length of hospital stay was 5 weeks and average time to ambulation was 4 weeks. The average follow-up time was 7.5 years (range, 3-12 years). Complications encountered were hematoma (six), prolonged pain (six), total flap loss (two), reoperation (five), and infection (four). Limb salvage rates were 96.2%.
CONCLUSION: When ipsilateral limb vessels are not available, and other reconstructive options have been exhausted, cross leg flaps can be a viable option for limb salvage in the setting of extensive defects.