INTRODUCTION: The cross finger flap is a useful option for coverage of finger defects. The Adipofascial flap, a variant has been a good option being aesthetically more acceptable. Since hand is generally exposed part, we tried to find out the aesthetic value of the adipofascial cross finger flap. METHODS: We operated on 15 patients who had complex defects on the fingers, who needed a flap cover and accepted for the adipofascial variant. We asked for ten independent non-medical literate persons to rate the photos of donor site and recipient site of these patients. We also requested the same ten people to rate the photos of similar, paired defects of the standard flap, which were obtained from the department archive. RESULTS: All the flaps survived. The mean score for adipofascial flap donor finger was 3.859 and it was 3.6 for the donor finger of the standard cross finger flap. The Cornbach's alpha of the interpretors was more than 0.7 for donor fingers and more than 0.9 for recipient fingers. The ICC was 0.767 foradipofascial donor finger and more than 0.9 for recipient fingers of both flaps. CONCLUSION: Adipofascial cross finger flap may be an aesthetically better flap.
INTRODUCTION: The cross finger flap is a useful option for coverage of finger defects. The Adipofascial flap, a variant has been a good option being aesthetically more acceptable. Since hand is generally exposed part, we tried to find out the aesthetic value of the adipofascial cross finger flap. METHODS: We operated on 15 patients who had complex defects on the fingers, who needed a flap cover and accepted for the adipofascial variant. We asked for ten independent non-medical literate persons to rate the photos of donor site and recipient site of these patients. We also requested the same ten people to rate the photos of similar, paired defects of the standard flap, which were obtained from the department archive. RESULTS: All the flaps survived. The mean score for adipofascial flapdonor finger was 3.859 and it was 3.6 for the donor finger of the standard cross finger flap. The Cornbach's alpha of the interpretors was more than 0.7 for donor fingers and more than 0.9 for recipient fingers. The ICC was 0.767 foradipofascial donor finger and more than 0.9 for recipient fingers of both flaps. CONCLUSION:Adipofascial cross finger flap may be an aesthetically better flap.
Entities:
Keywords:
Adipofascial flap; Aesthetic; Standard cross finger flap