Local Free-Style Perforator Flaps in Head and Neck Reconstruction: An Update and a Useful Classification.

BACKGROUND: Any standard skin flap of the body including a detectable or identified perforator at its axis can be safely designed and harvested in a free-style fashion. METHODS: Fifty-six local free-style perforator flaps in the head and neck region, 33 primary and 23 recycle flaps, were performed in 53 patients. The authors introduced the term "recycle" to describe a perforator flap harvested within the borders of a previously transferred flap. A Doppler device was routinely used preoperatively for locating perforators in the area adjacent to a given defect. The final flap design and degree of mobilization were decided intraoperatively, depending on the location of the most suitable perforator and the ability to achieve primary closure of the donor site. Based on clinical experience, the authors suggest a useful classification of local free-style perforator flaps. RESULTS: All primary and 20 of 23 recycle free-style perforator flaps survived completely, providing tension-free coverage and a pleasing final contour for patients. In the remaining three recycle cases, the skeletonization of the pedicle resulted in pedicle damage, because of surrounding postradiotherapy scarring and flap failure. All donor sites except one were closed primarily, and all of them healed without any complications. CONCLUSIONS: The free-style concept has significantly increased the potential and versatility of the standard local and recycled head and neck flap alternatives for moderate to large defects, providing a more robust, custom-made, tissue-sparing, and cosmetically superior outcome in a one-stage procedure, with minimal donor-site morbidity. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, V.

Heterotopic Procedures in Mutilating Hand Injuries: A Synopsis of Essential Reconstructive Tools.

BACKGROUND: In the complex and challenging treatment of a mutilating hand injury, any available resources need to be primarily recruited. Besides direct digital replantation, the tissue of the nonreplantable "spare parts" could often be "recycled," and also some replantable or injured structures could be "redistributed" in a more functional individualized pattern, irrespective of their initial origin. METHODS: Ten patients, six male and four female, were treated for multidigital mutilating injury with various "heterotopic" procedures. Immediate digital heterotopic replantations were performed in seven patients. In one case, the bone and skin of a nonreplantable digital part were used as grafts in the reconstruction of a metacarpal bone and the overlying skin defect. A neurovascular fillet flap from a nonreplantable finger for the reconstruction of the webspace and a pollicization of an injured index were undertaken in two further cases. Another patient underwent pedicled transfer of the proximal interphalangeal joint and metacarpal bone of an impaired index to the middle finger. RESULTS: Sensate prehensile function was restored in 100 percent of the cases, and the ability for tripod pinch and more subtle tasks was restored in 90 percent. The minimum of two long fingers and a thumb was restored in every case, and the patients judged the appearance of their hands as "acceptable." CONCLUSION: In the reconstruction of a mutilating hand injury, besides and beyond the straightforward microsurgery, the various heterotopic procedures are essential reconstructive tools that can enhance the versatility of the hand surgeon when pursuing a better outcome. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, IV.