Institutional Repository in Medical Sciences
(IRMS – Nicolae Testemițanu SUMPh)

Free mini-flaps in finger’s soft-tissues defects recontruction

Show simple item record

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


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • MedEspera 2020
    The 8th International Medical Congress for Students and Young Doctors, September 24-26, 2020

Show simple item record

Search DSpace


Advanced Search

Browse

My Account

Statistics