dc.contributor.author |
Melenciuc, Maxim |
|
dc.contributor.author |
Catarau, Olesea |
|
dc.date.accessioned |
2020-10-20T19:50:30Z |
|
dc.date.available |
2020-10-20T19:50:30Z |
|
dc.date.issued |
2020 |
|
dc.identifier.citation |
MELENCIUC, Maxim, CATARAU, Olesea. Free mini-flaps in finger’s soft-tissues defects reconstruction. In: MedEspera: the 8th Internat. Medical Congress for Students and Young Doctors: abstract book. Chișinău: S. n., 2020, pp. 98-99. ISBN 978-9975-151-11-5. |
en_US |
dc.identifier.isbn |
978-9975-151-11-5 |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
https://medespera.asr.md/wp-content/uploads/ABSTRACT-BOOK.pdf |
|
dc.identifier.uri |
http://repository.usmf.md/handle/20.500.12710/12253 |
|
dc.description |
Republican Center of Reconstructive Microsurgery, Institute of Emergency Medicine, Nicolae Testemitanu State University of Medicine and Pharmacy, Chisinau, Republic of Moldova, The 8th International Medical Congress for Students and Young Doctors, September 24-26, 2020 |
en_US |
dc.description.abstract |
Introduction. Reconstruction of fingers with skin and soft tissue defects remains
challenging. Optimal reconstructive treatment should be simple, reliable, cost effective, and
provide pliable, sensitive, and cosmetically similar tissue that will allow adequate function. A
free flap of appropriate size may provide ideal surgical solution, since is associated with shorter
time of returning to work and satisfactory function and aesthetic appearance.
Aim of the study. To compare outcomes of fingers’reconstruction using free arterialized
venous flap (AVF), superficial palmar branch of radial artery flap (SUPBRA), dorsal radial
perforator flap (DRAP), and dorsal ulnar perforator flap (DUAP) harvested from ipsilateral
extremity.
Materials and methods. During 6 months were performed 4 types of free flaps from the
ipsilateral extremity in reconstruction of finger’s defects, with small/moderate skin
defects, including: 1 AVF, 3 SUPBRAs, 1 DRAP, and 1 DUAP. Standardized assessment of
outcomes was performed, including duration of operation, objective sensory recovery, cold
intolerance, time of returning to work, active total range of motion (ROM) of injured fingers, and
cosmetic appearance of donor/recipient sites.
Results. All flaps survived completely, follow-up duration was 12months. Mean duration of
complete surgical procedure for AVFs was distinctly shorter than for others. SUPBPRA was
used to reconstruct skin and extensor tendon defects using vascularized palmaris longus graft
in 1 case. Optimal sensory recovery was better in AVFs and SUPBRAs as compared in DUAPs
and DRAPs. No significant differences were noted in ROM or cold intolerance between 4
types. Optimal cosmetic satisfaction was noted for recipient sites of AVFs and donor sites of
SUPBRAs.
Conclusions. All 4 types of free flaps are a practical choice in finger reconstruction for
small/moderate-sized skin defects. SUBPRAs play an important role due to wider
indications, better sensory recovery and cosmetic appearance associated with this method. |
en_US |
dc.language.iso |
en |
en_US |
dc.publisher |
MedEspera |
en_US |
dc.subject |
fingers |
en_US |
dc.subject |
reconstruction |
en_US |
dc.subject |
free flaps |
en_US |
dc.title |
Free mini-flaps in finger’s soft-tissues defects recontruction |
en_US |
dc.type |
Article |
en_US |