BACKGROUND: Discovering alternatives to workhorse flaps that have more consistent anatomy and lower donor-site morbidity has become a focus of reconstructive surgery research. This study provides a simplified approach to profunda artery perforator flap design and harvest based on reliable anatomical landmarks. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 70 patients who underwent 83 profunda artery perforator flap reconstructions for postoncologic defects from 2016 to 2018. The authors recorded and analyzed the profunda artery perforator flap sizes and clinical applications, the numbers and locations of the perforators, and the patient outcomes. RESULTS: Most of the profunda artery perforator flaps were for head and neck [46 patients (65.7 percent)] and breast [21 patients (30 percent)] reconstructions. Flaps were most commonly based on perforator A (33.7 percent) and perforator B (33.7 percent), followed by perforators B and C combined (18.1 percent). Perforators were located a mean of 7.5 cm (perforator A), 12.7 cm (B), and 17.6 cm (C) distal to the pubic tubercle parallel to the axis between the pubic tubercle and the medial femoral condyle and 7.9 cm (A), 7.3 cm (B), and 6.1 cm (C) posterior from the axis. There was no flap loss. One patient underwent successful salvage surgery after arterial flap thrombosis. Eight patients (9.6 percent) developed superficial wound dehiscence that was managed conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: Perforator mapping demonstrated consistent anatomical locations of sizeable profunda artery perforators in the inner thigh. Along with its consistent and robust vascular anatomy and minimal donor-site morbidity, the profunda artery perforator flap's volume and pliability make it a reliable option for soft-tissue reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
BACKGROUND: Discovering alternatives to workhorse flaps that have more consistent anatomy and lower donor-site morbidity has become a focus of reconstructive surgery research. This study provides a simplified approach to profunda artery perforator flap design and harvest based on reliable anatomical landmarks. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of 70 patients who underwent 83 profunda artery perforator flap reconstructions for postoncologic defects from 2016 to 2018. The authors recorded and analyzed the profunda artery perforator flap sizes and clinical applications, the numbers and locations of the perforators, and the patient outcomes. RESULTS: Most of the profunda artery perforator flaps were for head and neck [46 patients (65.7 percent)] and breast [21 patients (30 percent)] reconstructions. Flaps were most commonly based on perforator A (33.7 percent) and perforator B (33.7 percent), followed by perforators B and C combined (18.1 percent). Perforators were located a mean of 7.5 cm (perforator A), 12.7 cm (B), and 17.6 cm (C) distal to the pubic tubercle parallel to the axis between the pubic tubercle and the medial femoral condyle and 7.9 cm (A), 7.3 cm (B), and 6.1 cm (C) posterior from the axis. There was no flap loss. One patient underwent successful salvage surgery after arterial flap thrombosis. Eight patients (9.6 percent) developed superficial wound dehiscence that was managed conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: Perforator mapping demonstrated consistent anatomical locations of sizeable profunda artery perforators in the inner thigh. Along with its consistent and robust vascular anatomy and minimal donor-site morbidity, the profunda artery perforator flap's volume and pliability make it a reliable option for soft-tissue reconstruction. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.
Authors: Z-Hye Lee; Carrie K Chu; Malke Asaad; Jessie Liu; Jesse C Selber; Charles E Butler; Rene D Largo Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2022-03-24