Repository logo
 
Publication

Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Unconventional Perfusion Flaps in Clinical Practice

dc.contributor.authorCasal, D
dc.contributor.authorCunha, T
dc.contributor.authorPais, D
dc.contributor.authorVideira, P
dc.contributor.authorColoma, J
dc.contributor.authorZagalo, C
dc.contributor.authorAlmeida, MA
dc.contributor.authorGoyri O'Neill, J
dc.date.accessioned2022-03-30T14:17:41Z
dc.date.available2022-03-30T14:17:41Z
dc.date.issued2016
dc.description.abstractBackground: Although unconventional perfusion flaps have been in clinical use since 1975, many surgeons are still deterred from using them, because of some reports of high necrosis rates. Methods: The authors performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all articles written in English, French, German, Spanish, and Portuguese on the clinical use of unconventional perfusion flaps and indexed to PubMed from 1975 until July 15, 2015. Results: A total of 134 studies and 1445 patients were analyzed. The estimated survival rate of unconventional perfusion flaps was 89.5 percent (95 percent CI, 87.3 to 91.3 percent; p < 0.001). Ninety-two percent of unconventional perfusion flaps (95 percent CI, 89.9 to 93.7 percent; p < 0.001) presented complete or nearly complete survival. Most defects mandating unconventional perfusion flap reconstruction were caused by trauma (63.6 percent), especially of the hand and fingers (75.1 percent). The main complication of all types of flaps was a variable degree of necrosis (7.5 percent of all unconventional perfusion flaps presented marginal necrosis; 9.2 percent and 5.5 percent had significant and complete necrosis, respectively). There was a positive correlation between the rate of postoperative infection and the need for a new flap (Pearson coefficient, 0.405; p = 0.001). Flaps used to reconstruct the upper limb showed better survival than those transferred to the head and neck or to the lower limb (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Unconventional perfusion flaps show high survival rates and should probably be used more liberally, particularly in the realm of upper limb reconstruction. Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, V.pt_PT
dc.description.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionpt_PT
dc.identifier.citationPlast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Aug;138(2):459-479.pt_PT
dc.identifier.doi10.1097/PRS.0000000000002390.pt_PT
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.17/4021
dc.language.isoengpt_PT
dc.peerreviewedyespt_PT
dc.publisherLippincott. Williams & Wilkinspt_PT
dc.subjectHSJ CPRpt_PT
dc.subjectHumanspt_PT
dc.subjectMicrosurgery / methods*pt_PT
dc.subjectPostoperative Complications*pt_PT
dc.subjectReconstructive Surgical Procedures / methods*pt_PT
dc.subjectSurgical Flaps*pt_PT
dc.titleSystematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Unconventional Perfusion Flaps in Clinical Practicept_PT
dc.typejournal article
dspace.entity.typePublication
oaire.citation.endPage479pt_PT
oaire.citation.startPage459pt_PT
oaire.citation.titlePlastic and Reconstructive Surgerypt_PT
oaire.citation.volume138pt_PT
rcaap.rightsopenAccesspt_PT
rcaap.typearticlept_PT

Files

Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Loading...
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Systematic_Review_and_Meta_Analysis_of 33.pdf
Size:
5.27 MB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format

Collections