Use of a Reverse Metacarpal Bone Flap for the Treatment of Segmental Bone Defects of the Proximal Phalanges

PURPOSE

The purpose of this retrospective study was to report the results of reconstruction of segmental bone defects of the proximal phalanges using a reverse metacarpal vascularized bone flap harvested from the third metacarpal bone.

METHODS

From August 2012 to May 2017, 17 patients with segmental osteomyelitis or necrotic bone of the proximal phalanges were treated. There were 15 male and 3 female patients, with a mean age of 36 years (range, 19-65 years). The mean size of bone defects was 26 × 9 × 9 mm (range, 16 × 6 × 7 mm to 35 × 10 × 7 mm); and the mean size of bone flaps was 27 × 8 × 7 mm (range, 15 × 7 × 4 mm to 40 × 8 × 7 mm).

RESULTS

The mean follow-up period was 26 months. The mean motion arc of the metacarpophalangeal joints was 56° (range, 22°-90°). The mean pinch strength of the injured fingers was 3.1 kg (range, 2-3.6 kg), and the mean pinch strength of the normal contralateral side was 6.9 kg (range, 4.2- 8.5 kg).

CONCLUSIONS

The reverse metacarpal bone flap may promote osseous healing in reconstructing segmental defects of the proximal phalanges.

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic IV.

Finger reconstruction with dorsal metacarpal artery perforator flaps and dorsal finger perforator flaps based on the dorsal branches of the palmar digital arteries - 40 consecutive cases

Since the first description many variations of the dorsal metacarpal reverse island flap have been published but there is still uncertainty about which vascular component should be included for an optimal result. Therefore, it was the aim of this study to analyze vascular reliability and ischemic complications of dorsal metacarpal artery perforator (DMAP) flaps and dorsal finger perforator (DFP) flaps in our patient collective. We performed 40 of these flaps from the dorsum of hand and fingers for finger injuries. The choice of donor site was made according to the defect's location. Patients were analyzed with respect to flap necrosis, ischemic complications and achievement of overall reconstruction goals. In addition, we divided our patients in two groups, one group where we raised the flap from the dorsum of the proximal phalanx and a second one where the flaps were raised from the intermetacarpal space to identify complication rates based on the pedicles location. Of the 40 flaps, 36 survived completely. 4 partial necroses were observed in flaps transferred to more distal defects and in one flap that was used in a wrap-around technique for both dorsal and palmar proximal phalanx. These perforator flaps are a reliable method to cover finger defects and the dorsal metacarpal artery is not necessary for their survival, since the blood supply comes from perforating branches of the palmar vascular system. There is a clear trend for a higher complication rate in flaps raised from the dorsum of the fingers compared to the intermetacarpal space.