Yu-Ming Shen1, Zu-Yao Shen. 1. Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, Beijing Jishuitan Hospital, Beijing 100035, China. shenyuming1963@yahoo.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of greater omentum in reconstruction of refractory wounds. METHODS: From August 1988 to May 2001, 20 patients with refractory wound underwent pedicle or microvascular free transfer of the greater omentum. Indications of surgery were electrical injury of the wrist and hand in 9 patients, electrical injury of the scalp and cranial bones in 3, avulsion injury of the scalp in 2, radiation-related ulcer of the chest wall in 2, ulcer and osteomyelitis following resection of the sternum sarcoma in 1, electrical injury of the abdomen in 1, bone and soft tissue defects following compound fracture of the leg in 1, and extensive scar and ulcer of the leg and footdrop following trauma in 1. Severe infection and extensive tissue necrosis were present prior to surgical operation in 12 patients. Eleven patients were treated with pedicled omental flaps, and 9 patients with free omental flaps. The size of the omental flaps ranged from 20 cm x 12 cm to 38 cm x 23 cm. RESULTS: All the omental flaps survived. Healing at the first intention of the wounds was achieved in 17 cases. The on-top skin grafts resulted in partial necrosis of lipid liquefaction developed in the omentum and healed with dressing change in 2 cases. A sinus tract of osteomyelitis occurred in one case and healed after delayed excision of the necrosed bone. Follow-up study of all cases from 3 to 24 months showed no recurrent wounds and post-operative abdominal complication. Recovery with acceptable appearance and restoration of function was satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: Greater omentum provides a well-vascularized tissue with lymphatic ducts for wound coverage. It has strong resistance against infection. It is very malleable and can be molded easily. Therefore it is an ideal tissue in filling cavities and repairing defects, especially in covering large and irregular defects that can not be treated with skin or muscle flaps.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical efficacy of greater omentum in reconstruction of refractory wounds. METHODS: From August 1988 to May 2001, 20 patients with refractory wound underwent pedicle or microvascular free transfer of the greater omentum. Indications of surgery were electrical injury of the wrist and hand in 9 patients, electrical injury of the scalp and cranial bones in 3, avulsion injury of the scalp in 2, radiation-related ulcer of the chest wall in 2, ulcer and osteomyelitis following resection of the sternum sarcoma in 1, electrical injury of the abdomen in 1, bone and soft tissue defects following compound fracture of the leg in 1, and extensive scar and ulcer of the leg and footdrop following trauma in 1. Severe infection and extensive tissue necrosis were present prior to surgical operation in 12 patients. Eleven patients were treated with pedicled omental flaps, and 9 patients with free omental flaps. The size of the omental flaps ranged from 20 cm x 12 cm to 38 cm x 23 cm. RESULTS: All the omental flaps survived. Healing at the first intention of the wounds was achieved in 17 cases. The on-top skin grafts resulted in partial necrosis of lipid liquefaction developed in the omentum and healed with dressing change in 2 cases. A sinus tract of osteomyelitis occurred in one case and healed after delayed excision of the necrosed bone. Follow-up study of all cases from 3 to 24 months showed no recurrent wounds and post-operative abdominal complication. Recovery with acceptable appearance and restoration of function was satisfactory. CONCLUSIONS: Greater omentum provides a well-vascularized tissue with lymphatic ducts for wound coverage. It has strong resistance against infection. It is very malleable and can be molded easily. Therefore it is an ideal tissue in filling cavities and repairing defects, especially in covering large and irregular defects that can not be treated with skin or muscle flaps.