Quanzhe Liu1, Wenlai Guo1, Wenrui Qu1, Xiaolan Ou1, Rui Li1, Heng Tian2. 1. Department of Hand Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, Jilin, China. 2. Department of Hand Surgery, the Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, 13000, Jilin, China. th608774@jlu.edu.cn.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The treatment of defects on the volar surface of the finger has been scarcely reported, and its utility for digital resurfacing remains unclear. This study compared the outcomes of free medial plantar artery flap (MPAF) and dorsal digital-metacarpal flap (DDMF) in finger reconstruction. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 24 patients with soft-tissue defects on the volar surface of the finger from March 2014 to March 2017. The patients were divided into two groups: the MPAF group and the DDMF group. The operation time, complications, such as flap necrosis, graft loss, infection, paresthesia, and donor-site morbidity, as well as two-point discrimination (2-PD) were carefully recorded. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire was used for conduct follow-up assessment. RESULTS: After more than 12 months of follow-up, the MPAF group had a longer operative time compared with DDMF group, but there was no significant difference between postoperative complications and 2-PD test result in patients without nerve injury. And in terms of overall function, Modified VSS score and 2-PD test (the patients with nerve injury), There were relatively obvious statistical differences, MPAF was superior to DDMF (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: MPAF and DDMF are reliable for reconstruction of the volar surface of the finger; however, MPAF offers better functional outcomes and is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative complications.
BACKGROUND: The treatment of defects on the volar surface of the finger has been scarcely reported, and its utility for digital resurfacing remains unclear. This study compared the outcomes of free medial plantar artery flap (MPAF) and dorsal digital-metacarpal flap (DDMF) in finger reconstruction. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included 24 patients with soft-tissue defects on the volar surface of the finger from March 2014 to March 2017. The patients were divided into two groups: the MPAF group and the DDMF group. The operation time, complications, such as flap necrosis, graft loss, infection, paresthesia, and donor-site morbidity, as well as two-point discrimination (2-PD) were carefully recorded. The Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire was used for conduct follow-up assessment. RESULTS: After more than 12 months of follow-up, the MPAF group had a longer operative time compared with DDMF group, but there was no significant difference between postoperative complications and 2-PD test result in patients without nerve injury. And in terms of overall function, Modified VSS score and 2-PD test (the patients with nerve injury), There were relatively obvious statistical differences, MPAF was superior to DDMF (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION:MPAF and DDMF are reliable for reconstruction of the volar surface of the finger; however, MPAF offers better functional outcomes and is associated with a lower incidence of postoperative complications.
Authors: Gisele V Oliveira; David Chinkes; Charles Mitchell; Gloria Oliveras; Hal K Hawkins; David N Herndon Journal: Dermatol Surg Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 3.398