Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique · 2014
[Sequelae after harvesting latissimus dorsi flap and derivates--review].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяОбзорНазвание 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.
Ismaïl M, Boucher F, Chauvel-Picard J, Shipkov H, Braye F, Mojallal A
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The latissimus dorsi (LD) appears as a therapeutic option in many cases of reconstruction. Its large surface and reliability make it an ideal therapeutic choice. Since its initial description in 1896 by Tansini, many publications have been reported on its clinical application and the low donor site morbidity. However, harvesting of LD can be a source of functionnal and aesthetic sequelae. The purpose of this study is to provide a state of the science regarding the potential functional, aesthetic and pain sequelae related to harvesting of LD flap in its original description, but also in its modifications (muscle-sparing LD flap [MSLD-flap] and thoracodorsal artery perforator flap [TAP-flap]).
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of the literature was realized, the database PubMed was chosen. Keywords used for the research were: LD flap; LD flap morbidity; donor site sequelae of LD flap; TAP-flap AND donor site morbidity; MSLD-flap AND donor site morbidity.
RESULTS: Literature report suggests that harvesting of the whole LD muscle flap can provoke pain and functional deficit which diminish and even tend to disappear over time due to functional replacement by the other muscle groups. The partial (MSLD) or total (TAP-flap) preservation of the muscle leads to less pain, functional and aesthetic sequelae. These results are supported by objective, reliable and reproducible studies.
CONCLUSION: Well-targeted and well-designed studies could allow for better evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of each technique. This would lead to better selection of candidates for each technique.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: A review of the literature was realized, the database PubMed was chosen. Keywords used for the research were: LD flap; LD flap morbidity; donor site sequelae of LD flap; TAP-flap AND donor site morbidity; MSLD-flap AND donor site morbidity.
RESULTS: Literature report suggests that harvesting of the whole LD muscle flap can provoke pain and functional deficit which diminish and even tend to disappear over time due to functional replacement by the other muscle groups. The partial (MSLD) or total (TAP-flap) preservation of the muscle leads to less pain, functional and aesthetic sequelae. These results are supported by objective, reliable and reproducible studies.
CONCLUSION: Well-targeted and well-designed studies could allow for better evaluation of the advantages and disadvantages of each technique. This would lead to better selection of candidates for each technique.