Search

Background:  Microvascular reconstruction of the lower extremity has the highest reported complication and flap failure rates of any anatomical region. Despite widespread adoption of the mechanical anastomotic venous coupler and encouraging results in other anatomical regions, there are limited reports examining its use in the lower extremity. This study compares outcomes between coupled and hand-sewn venous anastomoses in traumatic lower extremity reconstruction., Methods:  Retrospective review of our institutional flap registry from 1979 to 2016 identified soft tissue free flaps performed for the reconstruction of Gustilo type IIIB/IIIC open tibial fractures. Patient demographics, flap characteristics, use of a venous anastomotic coupler, and perioperative outcomes were examined. Analysis was performed using chi-square and Student's t -tests., Results:  A total of 361 patients received a microvascular free flap for coverage of a Gustilo type IIIB or IIIC tibial fracture following traumatic injury. After excluding cases that lacked adequate information on coupler use, 358 free flaps were included in the study. There were 72 (20%) free flaps performed using a venous coupler and 286 (80%) performed with hand-sewn venous anastomoses. There were comparable rates of major complications (22.2 vs. 26.1%; p  = 0.522), total flap failure (6.5%, vs. 10.2%; p  = 0.362), and partial flap failure (9.7 vs. 12.2%; p  = 0.579) between venous coupler and hand-sewn anastomoses, respectively. Furthermore, use of the venous coupler was not associated with increased rates of operative take backs (22.8 vs. 23.0%; p  = 0.974). However, reconstructions performed using a venous coupler were significantly more likely to have a second venous anastomosis performed (37.5 vs. 21.3%; p  = 0.004)., Conclusion:  Complication and flap failure rates were similar between reconstructions performed with a venous coupler and those performed with hand-sewn venous anastomoses. These findings suggest that use of the venous anastomotic coupler is safe and effective in lower extremity reconstruction, with comparable outcomes to conventional sutured anastomoses., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.)

Purpose: Free tissue transfer after lower extremity trauma is associated with notoriously high complication rates. Theoretically, the inclusion of a cutaneous paddle on muscle free flaps may improve clinical flap monitoring. The effect of skin paddle presence on muscle free flap salvage outcomes after take-back was examined., Methods: Retrospective query of our institutional free-flap registry (1979-2016) identified 362 muscle-based flaps performed for soft tissue coverage after below-knee trauma. Primary outcome measures were perioperative complications, specifically take-back indications, timing, and flap salvage rates. Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were performed where appropriate., Results: The most common flaps were latissimus dorsi (166; 45.9%), rectus abdominis (123; 34%), and gracilis (42; 11.6%) with 90 flaps (24.9%) including skin paddles. Take-backs for vascular compromise occurred in 44 flaps (12.2%), of which 39% contained a skin paddle while 61% did not. Overall salvage rate was 20.5%, with 31.8% partial failures and 47.7% total flap losses. Muscle flaps with skin paddles were more likely to return to the operating room within 48 hours postoperatively than those without (57.1% vs 18.2%, P = 0.036). After take-back, significantly more muscle flaps with skin paddles were salvaged compared with muscle flaps without paddles (35.7% vs 4.5%, P = 0.024). Similarly, more muscle-only flaps after take-back failed compared with their counterparts with skin paddles (95.5% vs 65.3%, P = 0.024)., Conclusions: Muscle flaps with a cutaneous paddle were associated with earlier return to the operating room and more successful flap salvage after take-back compared with muscle-only flaps. These findings suggest that skin paddle presence may improve clinical flap monitoring and promote recognition and treatment of microvascular compromise in lower extremity reconstruction.

Background: Considering that muscle has higher metabolic demand than fasciocutaneous tissue and can be more difficult to monitor clinically, the authors compared take-back salvage rates between fasciocutaneous and muscle free flaps for lower extremity trauma reconstruction., Methods: The authors conducted a retrospective review of 806 free flaps (1979 to 2016); 481 soft-tissue flaps performed for below-knee trauma met inclusion criteria. Primary outcome measures were perioperative complications, specifically, take-backs and flap salvage rates. Univariate and multivariate regression analysis was performed where appropriate., Results: Take-backs occurred in 71 flaps (muscle, n = 44; fasciocutaneous, n = 27) at an average of 3.7 ± 5.4 days postoperatively. Indications were venous (48 percent), arterial (31 percent), unknown (10 percent), and hematoma (10 percent). Overall outcomes were complete salvage (37 percent), partial failure (25 percent), and total failure (38 percent). Take-backs occurring within 48 hours postoperatively correlated with higher salvage rates (p = 0.022). Fasciocutaneous flaps demonstrated increased take-back rates compared with muscle flaps (p = 0.005) that more frequently occurred within 48 hours postoperatively (relative risk, 13.2; p = 0.012). Fasciocutaneous flaps were successfully salvaged more often than muscle-based flaps (p < 0.001). Multivariable regression strongly demonstrated higher risk of take-back failure for muscle flaps (relative risk, 9.42; p = 0.001), despite higher take-back rates among fasciocutaneous flaps (relative risk, 2.28; p = 0.004)., Conclusions: Compared with muscle-based flaps, fasciocutaneous flaps demonstrated earlier and more frequent take-backs for suspected vascular compromise, with higher successful take-back salvage rates. Furthermore, muscle flaps with skin paddles also demonstrated better salvage outcomes than those without. These findings may reflect a combination of lower metabolic demand and easier visual recognition of vascular compromise in fasciocutaneous tissue., Clinical Question/level of Evidence: Therapeutic, III.

Introduction: Despite a recent rise in popularity of endovascular techniques, open bypass surgery is still required for treating many lower extremity vascular lesions. Greater saphenous vein (GSV) of adequate length and caliber for successful infrainguinal lower extremity bypass is unavailable in 15% to 45% of patients. To overcome limitations imposed by absent vein due to prior use, short vessel length, or sclerotic segments, both alternate (ie, basilic and cephalic) and GSV conduits may be "spliced" together in series via venovenostomy. Although vascular surgeons typically perform a hand-sewn venovenostomy, device-based venous coupling has been performed by plastic surgeons for many years. We therefore sought to review our experience with venous coupling for segmental lower extremity bypass graft assembly., Methods: A retrospective review was performed in all patients who underwent lower extremity revascularization using autogenous vein grafts spliced together with the Synovis (Birmingham, Alabama) anastomotic coupler at a single institution over a 5-year period., Results: The anastomotic coupler device was used on 5 patients for 7 venovenostomies. The mean age of patients was 66 years, and the mean follow-up period was 751 days. Two patients were lost to follow-up, while 2 other patients died of causes unrelated to their lower extremity bypass. The average time to perform venovenostomy was 3 minutes. Three patients developed stenosis of their composite graft at a site other than the venovenostomy, who were successfully treated with either angioplasty or bypass revision. One-year primary and primary-assisted patency rates were 50% and 75%, respectively., Conclusions: Given the known benefits of the anastomotic coupling device when used for venous anastomoses in microsurgical reconstruction, transition of this device to the vascular surgery realm represents a logical progression. Although small, our series demonstrates that the anastomotic coupler can successfully be used for the formation of spliced autogenous grafts for lower extremity revascularization in the absence of adequate GSV., (© The Author(s) 2015.)

Background Recipient vessels proximal to the zone of injury have traditionally been preferred for lower extremity reconstruction. However, more recent data have shown mixed outcomes when performing anastomoses distal to the zone of injury. We investigated the impact of recipient vessel location on free flap outcomes. Methods Retrospective review (1979-2016); 312 soft tissue free flaps for open tibia fractures met inclusion criteria. Flap characteristics and perioperative outcomes were examined. Systematic review identified articles evaluating anastomosis location and flap outcomes; pooled data analysis was performed. Results More anastomoses were performed proximal to the zone of injury (80.7%) than distal (19.3%). Distal anastomoses were not associated with increased take back rates (19.6%) compared with proximal (23.8%) anastomoses (p = 0.356). Regression analysis comparing proximal and distal anastomoses found no difference in partial flap failures (7.4% vs 11.9%; p = 0.978) or total flap failures (9.3% vs 9.3%; p = 0.815)when controlling for the presence of arterial injury, flap type, and time from injury to coverage. Systematic review yielded 11 articles with 1,245 proximal and 127 distal anastomoses for comparison. Pooled analysis (p = 0.58) and weighted comparative analysis (p = 0.39) found no difference in flap failure rates between proximal and distal groups. Conclusion Our results are congruent with the current lower extremity literature and demonstrate no difference in perioperative complication rates between anastomoses performed proximal or distal to the zone of injury. These findings suggest that anastomotic location choice should be based primarily on recipient vessel quality/ flow and ease of access/exposure rather than orientation relative to the zone of injury. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]