Coverage of radial forearm free flap donor site defect using another free flap

Lee, Jong Koo; Lee, Kyeong‐Tae

doi:10.1002/micr.31082

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This method did add considerable time to the procedure, mean harvest of 62.8 min (range 28-110), but this could be reduced with a two team approach. Complications were low and patients were satisfied with the results (Lee & Lee, 2023). A study by Hughes et al…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%

Comparison of the outcomes of split thickness skin graft versus full thickness skin graft for closure of the radial forearm free flap donor site: A systematic review

Mosquera,

Weyh,

Malik

et al. 2023

Microsurgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundRadial forearm free flap (RFFF) donor site closure is traditionally performed with split thickness skin grafts (STSG), which can be associated with poor aesthetics, wrist stiffness, paresthesia, reduced strength, and tendon exposure. Full thickness skin grafts (FTSG) are potentially beneficial as they provide a more durable coverage, and the skin graft donor site can be closed primarily, which is more aesthetic. The aim of this systematic review is to compare the outcomes of STSG versus FTSG for closure of the RFFF donor site.MethodsA systematic review was performed, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analysis guidelines. The primary objective was to answer: do subjects undergoing RFFF harvest, utilizing FTSG to close the RFFF donor site, compared to STSG, achieve superior aesthetics at the RFFF donor site? Included papers compared FTSG and STSG with statistical data. Means were compared with t‐test and proportions with Fisher's exact test.ResultsThe initial search resulted in 1851 studies. After applying the inclusion/exclusion criteria, the search resulted in eight studies, with 366 total skin grafts, 197 STSG and 169 FTSG. Six studies evaluated aesthetics utilizing a Likert scale, with the scaled average aesthetic score for FTSG being 7.9/10 compared to 6.9/10 for STSG (p < .001). Tendon exposure was measured in five studies, with a rate of 13.1% for STSG versus 10.6% for FTSG (p = .555). No significant difference in function was observed, however, methods to quantify function were heterogeneous.ConclusionFTSG compared to STSG, resulted in statistically significant improved aesthetics, with comparable rates of tendon exposure and function.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 80%