Contribution of Perforator Flaps in the Flap Selection for Head and Neck Reconstruction

Abstract

In head and neck reconstruction, microsurgeons are faced with various demands, such as thin resurfacing, or three-dimensional reconstruction, and therefore, conventional flap as well as perforator flaps are all useful for the functional and aesthetic reconstruction successfully. Among perforator flaps, the pros and cons of anterolateral thigh perforator flap(ALTp) and thoracodorsal perforator flap(TAp) is compared and selected depending on the surgeon’s preference, recipient site condition or patient status. Both flaps can be elevated in a chimeric pattern by combining different aspects of tissue components. Customized or tailored reconstruction as well as 3 dimensional reconstructions are all available with perforator flaps and it is useful in head and neck reconstruction. The most outstanding update in head and neck reconstruction is the perforator based island flap (PBIF) compared to conventional flaps. The conventional local flap has evolved on behalf of the perforator concept and its design becomes more flexible and freestyle with less limitations. Actually, random pattern flap is now a misnomer and most conventional local flaps turn into PBIFs. Finally we can say all conventional donor site becomes universal, depending on the surgeons’ preference or idea. Moreover, there is no more “flap of choice” and postoperative results are quite variable by surgeons’ ability. Operative procedures and plans are very flexible to freestyle flap. With all these advantages, surgeons should be armed with both conventional and perforator concepts for solving any defects or problems.