Donor-Site Morbidity Analysis of Thenar and Hypothenar Flap.

IF 1.3 Q3 SURGERY
Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS Pub Date : 2024-02-07 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1055/a-2168-4771
Dong Chul Lee, Ho Hyung Lee, Sung Hoon Koh, Jin Soo Kim, Si Young Roh, Kyung Jin Lee
{"title":"Donor-Site Morbidity Analysis of Thenar and Hypothenar Flap.","authors":"Dong Chul Lee, Ho Hyung Lee, Sung Hoon Koh, Jin Soo Kim, Si Young Roh, Kyung Jin Lee","doi":"10.1055/a-2168-4771","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>  For the small glabrous skin defect, Thenar and Hypothenar skin are useful donors and they have been used as a free flap. Because of similar skin characteristics, both flaps have same indications. We will conduct comparative study for the donor morbidity of the Free thenar flap and Hypothenar free flap. <b>Methods</b>  From January 2011 to December 2021, demographic data, characteristics of each flap, and complications using retrospective chart review were obtained. Donor outcomes of the patient, who had been followed up for more than 6 months, were measured using photographic analysis and physical examination. General pain was assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, neuropathic pain was assessed by Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) score, scar appearance was assessed by modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS), and patient satisfaction was assessed on a 3-point scale. Statistical analysis was performed on the outcomes. <b>Results</b>  Out of the 39 survey respondents, 17 patients received Free thenar flaps, and 22 patients received Hypothenar free flaps. Thenar group had higher NRS, DN4, and mVSS ( <i>p</i>  < 0.05). The average scores for the Thenar and Hypothenar groups were 1.35 and 0.27 for NRS, 2.41 and 0.55 for DN4, and 3.12 and 1.59 for mVSS, respectively. Despite the Hypothenar group showing greater satisfaction on the 3-point scale (1.82) compared with the Thenar group (1.47), the difference was not significant ( <i>p</i>  = 0.085). Linear regression analysis indicated that flap width did not have a notable impact on the outcome measures, and multiple linear regression analysis revealed no significant interaction between flap width and each of the outcome measures. <b>Conclusion</b>  Despite the limited number of participants, higher donor morbidity in general pain, neuropathic pain, and scar formation was noted in the Thenar free flap compared with the Hypothenar free flap. However, no difference in overall patient satisfaction was found between the two groups.</p>","PeriodicalId":47543,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10901602/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Plastic Surgery-APS","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2168-4771","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background  For the small glabrous skin defect, Thenar and Hypothenar skin are useful donors and they have been used as a free flap. Because of similar skin characteristics, both flaps have same indications. We will conduct comparative study for the donor morbidity of the Free thenar flap and Hypothenar free flap. Methods  From January 2011 to December 2021, demographic data, characteristics of each flap, and complications using retrospective chart review were obtained. Donor outcomes of the patient, who had been followed up for more than 6 months, were measured using photographic analysis and physical examination. General pain was assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, neuropathic pain was assessed by Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) score, scar appearance was assessed by modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS), and patient satisfaction was assessed on a 3-point scale. Statistical analysis was performed on the outcomes. Results  Out of the 39 survey respondents, 17 patients received Free thenar flaps, and 22 patients received Hypothenar free flaps. Thenar group had higher NRS, DN4, and mVSS ( p  < 0.05). The average scores for the Thenar and Hypothenar groups were 1.35 and 0.27 for NRS, 2.41 and 0.55 for DN4, and 3.12 and 1.59 for mVSS, respectively. Despite the Hypothenar group showing greater satisfaction on the 3-point scale (1.82) compared with the Thenar group (1.47), the difference was not significant ( p  = 0.085). Linear regression analysis indicated that flap width did not have a notable impact on the outcome measures, and multiple linear regression analysis revealed no significant interaction between flap width and each of the outcome measures. Conclusion  Despite the limited number of participants, higher donor morbidity in general pain, neuropathic pain, and scar formation was noted in the Thenar free flap compared with the Hypothenar free flap. However, no difference in overall patient satisfaction was found between the two groups.

鱼际与鱼际下游离皮瓣供体发病率的比较研究
背景对于小面积无毛皮肤缺损,鱼际和小鱼际皮肤是有用的供体,已被用作游离皮瓣。由于相似的皮肤特征,两种皮瓣具有相同的适应症。我们将对鱼际和小鱼际游离皮瓣的供体发病率进行比较研究。方法从2011年1月至2021年12月,采用回顾性图表回顾法获取人口统计学数据、各皮瓣的特点和并发症。随访超过6个月的患者通过照片分析和体格检查测量了供体的结果。一般疼痛,通过数字评定量表(NRS)评分评估,神经性疼痛,通过DN4(Douler Neuropathique 4 Questions)评分评估;疤痕外观,通过改良的温哥华疤痕量表(mVSS)评估;患者满意度,通过三分制评估。对结果进行统计分析。结果在39名调查对象中,17名患者接受了鱼际游离皮瓣,22名患者接受鱼际游离瓣。鱼际模型组NRS、DN4和mVSS的发病率较高(p<0.05)。尽管鱼际模型在三点量表上表现出更高的满意度,但差异并不显著(p=0.085)。线性回归分析表明,皮瓣宽度对结果测量没有显著影响,多元线性回归分析显示,皮瓣宽度和每个结果指标之间没有显著的相互作用。结论与鱼际线下游离皮瓣相比,鱼际线游离皮瓣在全身疼痛、神经性疼痛和瘢痕形成方面的供者发病率较高。然而,总体患者满意度没有差异。
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
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
6.70%
发文量
131
审稿时长
10 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
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