Maximizing Outcomes While Minimizing Morbidity: An Illustrated Case Review of Elbow Soft Tissue Reconstruction.

Plastic Surgery International Pub Date : 2016-01-01 Epub Date: 2016-05-29 DOI:10.1155/2016/2841816
Adrian Ooi, Jonathan Ng, Christopher Chui, Terence Goh, Bien Keem Tan
{"title":"Maximizing Outcomes While Minimizing Morbidity: An Illustrated Case Review of Elbow Soft Tissue Reconstruction.","authors":"Adrian Ooi,&nbsp;Jonathan Ng,&nbsp;Christopher Chui,&nbsp;Terence Goh,&nbsp;Bien Keem Tan","doi":"10.1155/2016/2841816","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background. Injuries to the elbow have led to consequences varying from significant limitation in function to loss of the entire upper limb. Soft tissue reconstruction with durable and pliable coverage balanced with the ability to mobilize the joint early to optimize rehabilitation outcomes is paramount. Methods. Methods of flap reconstruction have evolved from local and pedicled flaps to perforator-based flaps and free tissue transfer. Here we performed a review of 20 patients who have undergone flap reconstruction of the elbow at our institution. Discussion. 20 consecutive patients were identified and included in this study. Flap types include local (n = 5), regional pedicled (n = 7), and free (n = 8) flaps. The average size of defect was 138 cm(2) (range 36-420 cm(2)). There were no flap failures in our series, and, at follow-up, the average range of movement of elbow flexion was 100°. Results. While the pedicled latissimus dorsi flap is the workhorse for elbow soft tissue coverage, advancements in microvascular knowledge and surgery have brought about great benefit, with the use of perforator flaps and free tissue transfer for wound coverage. Conclusion. We present here our case series on elbow reconstruction and an abbreviated algorithm on flap choice, highlighting our decision making process in the selection of safe flap choice for soft tissue elbow reconstruction. </p>","PeriodicalId":20105,"journal":{"name":"Plastic Surgery International","volume":"2016 ","pages":"2841816"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2016/2841816","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic Surgery International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/2841816","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2016/5/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Background. Injuries to the elbow have led to consequences varying from significant limitation in function to loss of the entire upper limb. Soft tissue reconstruction with durable and pliable coverage balanced with the ability to mobilize the joint early to optimize rehabilitation outcomes is paramount. Methods. Methods of flap reconstruction have evolved from local and pedicled flaps to perforator-based flaps and free tissue transfer. Here we performed a review of 20 patients who have undergone flap reconstruction of the elbow at our institution. Discussion. 20 consecutive patients were identified and included in this study. Flap types include local (n = 5), regional pedicled (n = 7), and free (n = 8) flaps. The average size of defect was 138 cm(2) (range 36-420 cm(2)). There were no flap failures in our series, and, at follow-up, the average range of movement of elbow flexion was 100°. Results. While the pedicled latissimus dorsi flap is the workhorse for elbow soft tissue coverage, advancements in microvascular knowledge and surgery have brought about great benefit, with the use of perforator flaps and free tissue transfer for wound coverage. Conclusion. We present here our case series on elbow reconstruction and an abbreviated algorithm on flap choice, highlighting our decision making process in the selection of safe flap choice for soft tissue elbow reconstruction.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

最大限度地提高疗效,同时降低发病率:肘部软组织重建的一个病例回顾。
背景。肘部损伤导致的后果从功能明显受限到整个上肢丧失不等。具有持久和柔韧覆盖的软组织重建与早期活动关节的能力平衡以优化康复结果是至关重要的。方法。皮瓣重建的方法已经从局部和带蒂皮瓣发展到以穿支为基础的皮瓣和自由组织转移。在此,我们回顾了20例在我院接受肘部皮瓣重建的患者。讨论:本研究确定并纳入了20例连续患者。皮瓣类型包括局部(n = 5)、局部带蒂(n = 7)和自由(n = 8)皮瓣。缺陷平均尺寸为138 cm(2)(范围36 ~ 420 cm(2))。在我们的研究中没有皮瓣失败,在随访中,肘关节屈曲的平均活动范围为100°。结果。虽然带蒂背阔肌皮瓣是肘关节软组织覆盖的主要方法,但微血管知识和外科手术的进步带来了巨大的好处,使用穿支皮瓣和自由组织转移进行伤口覆盖。结论。在此,我们将介绍肘关节重建的病例系列和皮瓣选择的简化算法,重点介绍我们在肘关节软组织重建中选择安全皮瓣的决策过程。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信