J Reconstr Microsurg 2018; 34(09): 719-728
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1651489
Original Article
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Superficial Circumflex Iliac Artery-Based Iliac Bone Flap Transfer for Reconstruction of Bony Defects

Hidehiko Yoshimatsu
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Cancer Institute Hospital, Japanese Foundation for Cancer Research, Koto-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Takuya Iida
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Takumi Yamamoto
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
,
Akitatsu Hayashi
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Graduate School of Medicine, University of Tokyo, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, Japan
› Author Affiliations

Funding None.
Further Information

Publication History

22 December 2017

25 March 2018

Publication Date:
12 May 2018 (online)

Preview

Abstract

Background The superficial circumflex iliac artery (SCIA)-based iliac bone flap has yet to be widely used. The purpose of this article is to validate the feasibility of SCIA-based iliac bone flap transfers for reconstruction of small to moderate-sized bony defects. Retrospective outcome comparisons between SCIA-based iliac bone flaps and fibula flaps were made.

Methods Twenty-six patients with bony tissue defects underwent reconstructions using either free SCIA-based iliac bone flaps (13) or fibula flaps (13). Outcomes were evaluated 9 months after the reconstruction on the following basis: bone length, pedicle length, skin paddle area, bone union, donor-site complications, skin paddle survival, and complications at the reconstructed site.

Results There was no statistically significant difference in pedicle length (iliac bone vs. fibula; 5.5 ± 1.8 vs. 4.1 ± 1.5 cm; p = 0.181), in bone union rate (iliac bone vs. fibula; 100 vs 92.3%; p = 0.308), in donor-site complication rate (iliac bone vs. fibula; 0 vs. 7.7%; p = 0.308), or in skin paddle complete survival rate (iliac bone vs. fibula; 100 vs. 83.3%; p = 0.125). Statistically significant differences were observed in bone flap length (iliac bone vs. fibula; 4.8 ± 2.2 vs. 11.1 ± 4.8 cm; p = 0.0005), in skin paddle area (superficial circumflex iliac artery perforator flap vs. peroneal artery perforator flap; 58.8 ± 35.6 vs. 27.7 ± 17.5 cm2; p = 0.0343), and in reconstructed site complication rate (iliac bone vs. fibula; 0 vs. 30.8%; p = 0.030).

Conclusion In our series of SCIA-based iliac bone flap transfers, up to 8 × 3 cm could be procured along the iliac crest. When compared with fibula flap transfers, there were no significant statistical differences in pedicle length or in bone union rate; the SCIA-based iliac bone flap may be a feasible option for bony defects of small to moderate size.

Ethics

This report was published with the consent and permission of the patients involved.


Prior Presentation

A part of this article was presented at the 2017 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Reconstructive Microsurgery.