| Literature DB >> 33133902 |
Petra M Grahn1, Noora N Nietosvaara1,2, Antti J Sommarhem1, Yrjana A Nietosvaara1.
Abstract
Can good functional and cosmetic result be achieved in syndactyly separation using a straight midline incision with a hexagonal dorsal skin flap?Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33133902 PMCID: PMC7572197 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002842
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open ISSN: 2169-7574
Patient Demographics and Outcome
| Results | |||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient | Web Space Affected | Type | Associated Condition | Follow-up (y) | Web Space Separated | Use of Skin Graft and Harvest Site | Cosmetic VAS | Functional VAS | Web Grade by Withey et al[ |
| 1 | 2 | SI PIP | Poland | 3.7 | 2 | 80 | 78 | 1 | |
| 2 | 3 | SI PIP | 3.4 | 3 | NA | NA | 0 | ||
| 3 | 3L (3R) | SC (SI PIP) | 1.7 | 3 | 95 | 94 | 1 | ||
| 4 | 2 | SI PIP | Poland | 2.1 | 2 | 94 | 93 | 0 | |
| 3 | SI PIP | 1.5 | 3 | 1 | |||||
| 4 | SI PIP | 2.1 | 4 | 0 | |||||
| 5 | 3 | SC | 1.0 | 3 | 82 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 4 | SC | 1.5 | 4 | 0 | |||||
| 6 | 2 | SI PIP | Symbrachydactyly | 1.8 | 2 | 95 | 96 | 1 | |
| 7 | 3 | SI PIP | 1.5 | 3 | 100 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 8 | 3 | C | 2.0 | 3 | 87 | 100 | 2 | ||
| 9 | 2 | SI DIP | 1.2 | 2 | 96 | 86 | 0 | ||
| 3 | SC | 0.6 | 3 | 1 | |||||
| 4 | SC | 1.2 | 4 | 1 | |||||
| 10 | 3 | SI PIP | 1.5 | 3 | 100 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 11 | 3 | SC | VSD | 0.9 | 3 | 52 | 85 | 0 | |
| 12 | 3R | C | 1.8 | 3 R | Local | 63 | 82 | 2 | |
| 3L | C | 1.8 | 3 L | Inguinal | 80 | 90 | 1 | ||
| 13 | 3 (4)* | SI PIP | Moebius | 0.8 | 3 | 100 | 90 | 1 | |
| 14 | 2L (3R) | SC (SI PIP) | Ulnar aplasia | 1.1 | 2 | Local | 90 | 90 | 0 |
| 15 | 3 | SI DIP | 1.1 | 3 | 90 | 100 | 1 | ||
| 16 | 4 | SI DIP | 1.0 | 4 | 90 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 17 | 2 | SI PIP | Poland | 1.1 | 2 | 89 | 89 | 1 | |
| 18 | 3R (2,4)* | CC (CC) | Constriction band | 1.2 | 3 R | Local | 72 | 63 | 1 |
| 3L (2,4)* | SI PIP (SI PIP) | 1.2 | 3 L | 94 | 94 | 1 | |||
| 19† | 3R | SC | 1.7 (0.5) | 3 R | –(80) | –(90) | 2 (0) | ||
| 3L | C | 1.7 (0.5) | 3 L | Local | –(80) | –(90) | 4 (0) | ||
| 20 | 2 | SI PIP | 1.0 | 2 R | 87 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 21 | 3R | SI PIP | 1.0 | 3 R | 100 | 100 | 1 | ||
| 3L | SI PIP | 1.0 | 3 L | 100 | 100 | 1 | |||
| 22 | 4R | SC | Hereditary | 0.8 | 4 R | 100 | 100 | 0 | |
| 4L | CC | 0.8 | 4 L | Inguinal | 89 | 100 | 1 | ||
| 23 | 4 | SC | 0.5 | 4 | 100 | 100 | 0 | ||
| 24 | 4R | SC | VSD, bilateral ulnar polydactyly | 0.5 | 4 R | 100 | 100 | 0 | |
| 4L | SC | 0.5 | 4 L | 100 | 100 | 0 | |||
| 25 | 2R (3) | CC (CC) | Constriction band | 0.5 | 2 R | Local | 56 | 64 | 1 |
| 4R | CC | 0.5 | 4 R | 56 | 64 | 0 | |||
| 2L (3) | SI PIP (SI PIP) | 0.5 | 2 L | 83 | 96 | 0 | |||
| 26 | 4 | CC | Foot anomaly | 0.5 | 4 | 79 | 92 | 0 | |
()Not separated.
()*Separated earlier using a different technique.
†Reoperation of web creep following postoperative infection. Follow-up time and Withey grade from reoperation in brackets.
L, left; NA, not answered; PIP, proximal interphalangeal joint; R, right; S, simple; VSD, ventricular septal defect.
Fig. 1.Grading of web creep according to Withey et al.[18] Grade 0: soft web, abduction mirrors the adjacent web or equivalent web on the other hand. Grade 1: no web advancement, but thickening of the web with reduced span. Grade 2: creep of web to 1/3 of the distance between base of the web and PIPJ crease. Grade 3: creep of web to 2/3 of the distance between base of the web and PIPJ crease. Grade 4: creep of web to the PIPJ crease. PIPJ indicates proximal interphalangeal joint.
Fig. 2.Surgical incisions and site for skin graft. The specific geometric measures for the dorsal hexagonal skin flap are based on the interspace of the knuckles of the fingers to be separated: the distance measured between the midpoints of the knuckles is the same as the height of the flap as well as the distal width (BC). AD = 2 × BC. *Can be used as a skin graft.
Video 1.Syndactyly Release. Video 1 from “New Simple Technique for Syndactyly Release”
Fig. 3.Defatting and skin closure. A, Hexagonal flap raised and dorsal defatting. B and C, Defatting from volar side and removal of the excess fat in one piece dorsally. D–F, Wound closure with absorbable sutures.
Fig. 4.Patient 1: simple incomplete syndactyly 3 years after surgery. A, View from dorsal side. B, View from palmar side.
Fig. 7.Patient 25, complicated (right hand) and SI PIP (left hand) syndactyly six months after first surgery (A and B). Same patient three weeks after second surgery (C and D). The last separation is not included in our results as the follow-up is too short.