Reciprocal Dominance of the Anterolateral and Anteromedial Thigh Flap Perforator Anatomy

The Anterolateral Thigh Flap in Head and Neck Reconstruction

The anterolateral thigh (ALT) free flap has become a workhorse for head and neck reconstruction. This paper offers a thorough introduction to the ALT flap, covering its anatomy, surgical technique, adaptable designs, and use in a range of clinical settings along with case studies. With its long vascular pedicle and tissue versatility, the ALT flap is well-suited for matching varied defects. Still, understanding possible anatomic variances and managing complications are critical to its success. With this paper as a comprehensive guidance, surgeons can apply the ALT flap for difficult head and neck reconstructions and achieve the best possible results.

Pharyngeaoesophageal Reconstruction

Pharyngoesophageal reconstruction is one of the most challenging reconstructive dilemmas that demands extensive planning, meticulous surgical execution, and timely management of postoperative complications. The main goals of reconstruction are to protect critical blood vessels of the neck, to provide alimentary continuity, and to restore functions such as speech and swallowing. With the evolution of techniques, fasciocutaneous flaps have become the gold standard for most defects in this region. Major complications include anastomotic strictures and fistulae, but most patients can tolerate an oral diet and achieve fluent speech after rehabilitation with a tracheoesophageal puncture.

Anteromedial thigh septocutaneous perforator flap as a first choice for head and neck reconstruction: A clinical algorithm based on perforator-pedicle relationship

BACKGROUND

Anterolateral thigh perforator flaps (ALTPFs) have long been considered workhorse flaps for head and neck reconstructions. However, in some instances, anteromedial thigh septocutaneous perforator flaps (AMTPFs) are easier to harvest than ALTPFs. This study aimed to determine when and how the AMTPF should be considered the first choice as a reconstructive tool.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed in the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-Head & Neck Oncology, Shanghai Ninth People Hospital, from January 2014 to December 2018. Both the perforator-pedicle relationships and postoperative functional outcomes were compared.

RESULTS

A total of 168 patients were included in this study, among whom 49 underwent AMTPF reconstructions. The AMTPF perforators in this study were mostly septocutaneous (n = 38, 77.5%). Notably, the AMTPF perforators mainly originated from the medial branch of the descending branches of the lateral circumflex femoral arteries (n = 44, 89.8%), while for the other 5 patients, the perforators were found to originate from the superficial femoral arteries. Additionally, the average pedicle length of the AMTPFs was 8.7 cm (range: 6.0 to 13.0 cm), which was comparable to that of the ALTPFs (8.9 cm) (p = 0.442). The postoperative complication rate and functional outcomes were comparable between the two groups. The algorithm and harvesting approaches are presented.

CONCLUSIONS

The role of AMTPF should not be downplayed. After careful preoperative evaluation, we believe that AMTPF should not be considered a second choice in patients with sizable septocutaneous perforators.

Defect Reconstruction Using the Propeller Flaps Based on the Perforators Derived From the Lateral Circumflex Femoral Artery System

BACKGROUND

Although propeller flaps are a useful option for soft tissue defect reconstruction, reports based on the perforators of the lateral circumflex femoral artery (LCFA) are rare. We aimed to present our experience in defect reconstruction using the propeller flaps based on perforators from different branches of LCFA and apply these flaps in soft tissue defect reconstruction of the lower extremities.

METHODS

Twenty nine patients (32 flaps) underwent defect reconstruction using propeller flaps based on the perforator of the LCFA. Defects were located from the groin to the proximal leg. According to the source vessels from which the perforator originated, flaps were categorized into types I, II, III and IV, which represented perforators from the transverse, descending, oblique, and rectus femoris branches, respectively. Type II flaps were subdivided into types IIa and IIb flaps based on antegrade and reverse flows of the descending branch.

RESULTS

Flap sizes ranged from 12 × 6 cm to 30 × 15 cm (average, 22.69 × 9.19 cm) with the length of the vascular pedicle ranging from 3 to 7 cm (average, 4.86 cm). Flaps were rotated from 60° to 180° (average, 144.06°). There were 3 type I, 10 type IIa, 4 type IIb, 13 type III and, and 2 type IV flaps. Twenty-nine flaps survived after surgery. Total flap necrosis and venous congestion of the distal flap portion occurred in 1 and 2 patients, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Reconstruction using propeller flaps based on perforators of the LCFA is a safe, reliable, and versatile option for defect reconstruction of the lower extremities; however, it requires meticulous surgical dissection and patience.

Distally based anteromedial thigh flaps pedicled on the rectus femoris branch of the lateral circumflex femoral artery for reconstruction of soft-tissue defect of the knee

BACKGROUND

Anteromedial thigh flaps are far less clinically appealing than their anterolateral counterparts, and are occasionally considered as an alternative to the anterolateral thigh flap. Herein, we report the study of soft-tissue defects reconstruction in the knee using a distally based anteromedial thigh flap pedicled on the rectus femoris branch of the descending branch of the lateral circumflex femoral artery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between July 2008 and September 2016, a distally based anteromedial thigh flap was used to reconstruct soft-tissue defects of the knee in 5 patients (3 males, 2 females; age range at surgery 4-55 years old). The perforating vessels supplying anteromedial thigh were derived from the rectus femoris branch of the lateral circumflex femoral artery. The rectus femoris branch shared a common trunk with the descending branches of the lateral circumflex femoral artery. Defect etiologies included malignant neoplasms in 2 cases and post-burn scar contracture in the remaining 3 cases.

RESULTS

The average flap size was 19.6 × 9.2 cm (range: 15-24 × 6-12 cm). There was no flap loss. Postoperative muscle weakness occurred in one case. The average follow-up time was 17.8 months (range: 5-36 months). No recurrence of tumor or scar contracture was noted.

CONCLUSIONS

Distally based anteromedial thigh flaps pedicled on the rectus femoris branch of the descending branch of the lateral circumflex femoral artery may serve as an alternative option to the distally based anterolateral thigh flap for soft-tissue defect reconstruction of the knee.

Safety of the supraclavicular artery island flap in the setting of neck dissection and radiation therapy

BACKGROUND

The supraclavicular artery island flap (SAIF) has recently been repopularized as a versatile and reliable option for reconstruction of oncological head and neck defects. Prior ipsilateral neck dissection or irradiation is considered a relative contraindication to its use. The aim of this study was to describe the safety and utility of the SAIF for head and neck reconstruction in the setting of neck dissection and radiation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of consecutive SAIF reconstructions at two institutions between May 2011 and 2014. In addition to demographic data, comorbidities, indications, surgical characteristics, data about radiation treatment, and neck dissection were specifically recorded. Donor and recipient site complications were noted. Fisher exact test was performed to analyze if neck dissection or radiation were associated with complications.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients underwent SAIF reconstruction for an array of head and neck defects. Donor site infection was noted in one patient. Recipient site complications included, wound dehiscence (n = 2), orocutaneous fistula (n = 1), carotid blowout (n = 1), and total flap loss (n = 1). There was no association between prior neck dissection or radiation treatment and flap loss (p = 1.00).

CONCLUSION

The SAIF is safe for use in patients who have had an ipsilateral neck dissection involving level IV or V lymph nodes and/or radiation treatment to the neck. It can be used alone or in combination with other flaps for closure of a variety of head and neck defects.

Flap reconstruction of the elbow and forearm: a case-based approach

Elbow and forearm wounds have distinct reconstructive requirements, but both require a durable and pliable solution. Pedicle, free fasciocutaneous and muscle, and distant (2-stage) flaps have a role in wound reconstruction in these unique areas. This article presents practical surgical cases as a guide to soft tissue reconstruction of the elbow and forearm.