Background: Our objective was to compare the outcomes of dorsal hand defect reconstruction using a posterior interosseous artery flap (PIAF) and a reverse adipofascial radial forearm flap (RARFF).

Methods: From 2008 to 2013, 23 patients who underwent hand soft tissue defect reconstruction with PIAF (11 patients) and RARFF (12 patients) were included in this retrospective study. Reconstruction methods were compared in terms of functionality with disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand (DASH) score and range of motion (ROM) and aesthetically with scar assessment. Operation times, length of hospital stay, and donor site problems were compared.

Results: We found no statistically significant differences between PIAF and RARFF in terms of ROM, DASH score, and length of hospital stay. Statistically significant differences were found in operation time, scar assessment, and donor site problems between PIAF and RARFF patients.

Conclusion: RARFF showed better results than PIAF in dorsal hand defects, but in RARFF, the major arteries of the hand are sacrificed.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.5505/tjtes.2017.41196DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

dorsal hand
12
posterior interosseous
8
reverse adipofascial
8
adipofascial radial
8
radial forearm
8
forearm flap
8
soft tissue
8
hand defects
8
defect reconstruction
8
dash score
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!