ABSTRACT
Background: Gluteal pressure ulcers are a common problem, associated with great morbidity and cost, and their surgical treatment includes debridement with complete bursectomy, followed by soft tissue coverage. Gluteal artery perforator flaps and gluteal fasciocutaneous flaps are commonly preferred for reconstruction because they preserve the gluteal muscle, allowing for revision in recurrent cases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the differences between these two flaps in the reconstruction of gluteal pressure ulcers regarding operative time, postoperative hospital stay, postoperative complications, and recurrence. Methods: This prospective comparative study was conducted on 30 patients who presented with stage IV gluteal pressure ulcers. Patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups: each group consisted of 15 patients. Cases in group A were reconstructed using gluteal artery perforator flaps, and those in group B were reconstructed using local fasciocutaneous flaps. Results: There was statistically significant long operative time and short postoperative hospital stay in gluteal artery perforator flaps when compared with local fasciocutaneous flaps. Also, the fasciocutaneous group reported a higher nonsignificant complication rate when compared with the gluteal perforator group. No recurrent cases were reported, and most patients had satisfactory outcomes in both groups. Conclusion: Both techniques are safe, reliable, and effective and can be considered as a first-line option in the reconstruction of gluteal pressure ulcers.
