PDF herunterladen
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Indian J Plast Surg 2020; 53(02): 266-272
DOI: 10.1055/s-0040-1714318
Original Article

Retrospective Cohort Observational Study on the Single Best Perforator-Based Pacman Flap in the Reconstruction of Stage IV Sacral Region Pressure Ulcers

T. M. Balakrishnan
1   Department of Plastic and Faciomaxillary Surgery, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
Basker Kanagaraj Mariappan
1   Department of Plastic and Faciomaxillary Surgery, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
,
J. Jaganmohan
1   Department of Plastic and Faciomaxillary Surgery, Madras Medical College, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
› Institutsangaben Financial Support Declaration Nil.
› Weitere Informationen
Auch verfügbar auf
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Introduction Single best perforator-based Pacman flap (SBPBPF) fortifies the advancement and transposition flap biogeometry principles with robust blood supply of perforator flaps to provide cover for the sacral pressure sore of any dimension. This article describes the biogeometry and technique of raising the SBPBPF.

Aim To assess the outcomes of reconstruction of stage IV sacral pressure sore using the SBPBPF.

Materials and Methods A preliminary cadaver study was done in 24 gluteal specimens in fresh cadavers to determine the anatomical details of perforators of the perisacral region. From 2015 to 2017, 42 myelopathic patients (40 males and 2 females; quadriparetic n = 2 and paraplegic/paraparetic n = 40) underwent SBPBPF reconstruction of stage IV sacral pressure sore. Their documents were analyzed in this retrospective study. All were followed-up for an average period of 12.5 months.

Results Cadaver study revealed significant perforators arising from seven different source vessels in the perisacral region. In the clinical study, average size of the paddle harvested was 168 cm2 on a single best perforator. On an average, the size of the single best perforator harvested with the flap was 1.5 mm. None had early failures of flaps. Thirty-nine patients had well-settled flaps at the end of follow-up period except three (7%) who developed late recurrence due to loss of compliance with offloading instructions. Two experienced mild collections (flap complication rate was 4.76%) in the immediate postoperative period that healed uneventfully. The overall complication rate was 11.9%.

Conclusion SBPBPF is an excellent addendum to reconstructive tool for stage IV sacral pressure sores.

Keywords

pressure sores - perforator flaps - single best perforator based Pacman flap - biogeometry of Pacman flap


Publikationsverlauf

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
13. Juli 2020

© .

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd.
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 David G. Armstrong. Broadcast on pressure ulcer best practices at the NPUAP (serial online). Available at: https://diabeticfootonline.com/2019/05/02/keckmedusc-hosts-cmsgov-broadcast-on-pressure-ulcer-best-practices-thenpuap/. Accessed August 21, 2019
  • 2 VanGilder C, Amlung S, Harrison P, Meyer S. Results of the 2008-2009 International Pressure Ulcer Prevalence Survey and a 3-year, acute care, unit-specific analysis. Ostomy Wound Manage 2009; 55 (11) 39-45
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Meehan M. National pressure ulcer prevalence survey. Adv Wound Care 1994; 7 (03) 27-30, 34, 36–38
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Bennett G, Dealey C, Posnett J. The cost of pressure ulcers in the UK. Age Ageing 2004; 33 (03) 230-235
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Reddy M, Gill SS, Kalkar SR, Wu W, Anderson PJ, Rochon PA. Treatment of pressure ulcers: a systematic review. JAMA 2008; 300 (22) 2647-2662
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Sung YH, Park KH. Factors affecting the healing of pressure ulcers in a Korean acute care hospital. J Wound Ostomy Continence Nurs 2011; 38 (01) 38-45
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Neligan PC. Plastic surgery. New York, USA: Elsevier; 2018
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Stefano Bonomi MD, André Salval MD, Federica Brenta MD, Vincenzo Rapisarda MD, Fernanda Settembrini MD. The Pacman perforator-based V-Y advancement flap for reconstruction of pressure sores at different locations. Ann Plast Surg 2015; 77 (03) 324-331
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Blondeel PN, Morris SF, Hallock GG, Neligan PC.. Perforator flaps Anatomy, Technique, & Clinical Applications. 2nd ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Quality Medical Publishing, Inc; 2003
    Google Scholar
  • 10 Rubino C, Ramakrishnan V, Figus A, Bulla A, Coscia V, Cavazzuti MA. Flap size/flow rate relationship in perforator flaps and its importance in DIEAP flap drainage. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009; 62 (12) 1666-1670
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Koshima I, Moriguchi T, Soeda S, Kawata S, Ohta S, Ikeda A. The gluteal perforator-based flap for repair of sacral pressure sores. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993; 91 (04) 678-683
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Kroll SS, Rosenfield L. Perforator-based flaps for low posterior midline defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 1988; 81 (04) 561-566
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Yamamoto Y, Tsutsumida A, Murazumi M, Sugihara T. Long-term outcome of pressure sores treated with flap coverage. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997; 100 (05) 1212-1217
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Cushing CA, Phillips LG. Evidence-based medicine: pressure sores. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (06) 1720-1732
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Lemaire V, Boulanger K, Heymans O. Free flaps for pressure sore coverage. Ann Plast Surg 2008; 60 (06) 631-634
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Durgun M, Bas S. Repair of sacral and ischial region defects with lateral sacral artery perforator flaps. Ann Plast Surg 2019; 82 (03) 304-309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar