| Literature DB >> 26998451 |
Sérgio José de Lima1, Ricardo Pereira Domingos da Costa1, Emanoel de Oliveira1, Fabrício Guimarães Prudente2, Marcelo Paris Mendonça2, Christiano Soares de Camargo2.
Abstract
UNLABELLED: To assess the results achieved with posterior interbone artery flap covering serious injuries of the distal third of the forearm, wrist and hand, evaluating the degree of effectiveness of this procedure.Entities:
Keywords: Hand traumas; Surgical flaps; Wrist traumas
Year: 2015 PMID: 26998451 PMCID: PMC4783607 DOI: 10.1016/S2255-4971(15)30047-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Rev Bras Ortop ISSN: 2255-4971
Figure 1Marking of the anatomical references of the flap.
Figure 2Path of the posterior interosseous artery (dotted arrow) and its relationship to the posterior interosseous nerve (continuous arrow).
Figure 3Perforating cutaneous branches (arrows).
Figure 4Definition of the pedicle and flap rotation arc.
Figure 5A – Dorsal hand injury with tendon exposure. B – Final intraoperative result with donor area closed primary. C – Five months after surgery. D and E – Final mobility of the fingers.
Figure 6A – Extensive injury to the volar aspect of the forearm with exposure of muscle and tendon. B – Dissection of posterior interosseous artery and its perforators. C – Final appearance of the flap. D – Donor area with skin grafting.
Chart 1Complications encountered in flap implementation.
Figure 7A – Injury of the first commissure. B – Final intraoperative appearance. C – Two weeks after surgery. D – Six months after surgery with the flap area equalized with the rest of the hand.