ABSTRACT
Muscle and musculocutaneous flaps have been used reliably in reconstruction of soft-tissue
defects for many years. Previous experimental studies have shown musculocutaneous
flaps to be superior to the random pattern and fasciocutaneous flaps in the management
of infected wounds. Over the past decade, perforator flaps have gained acceptance
as alternative methods of reconstruction in the clinical setting that can decrease
donor-site morbidity and hospital stay, and increase patient satisfaction. The authors
theorized that perforator flaps may be able to handle infected wounds better than
random pattern and fasciocutaneous flaps because their blood supply is essentially
the same as many of their musculocutaneous counterparts. The goal of this study was
to compare the S1 perforator-based skin flap and latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous flap in the dorsal
flank of the rabbit with the introduction of bacteria to simulate both superficial
and deep wound infection. Measurements of oxygen tension and regional perfusion index
were performed on both types of flaps to ascertain their viability and capacity to
heal. The authors found no statistical significance between latissimus dorsi musculocutaneous
and S1 perforator flaps in the rabbit with respect to superficial and deep wound infections.
The regional perfusion index was calculated for postoperative days 1, 2, and 4. No
statistically significant difference between the two flaps using the regional perfusion
index could be identified. Additionally, regional perfusion for both types of flaps
was greater than 0.6, indicating that their capacity to heal wounds is similar.
KEYWORDS
Perforator flap - musculocutaneous flap - rabbit
REFERENCES
2 regional perfusion index to quantify tissue perfusion in peripheral vascular disease.
Ann Surg.
1983;
197
337-343
