The Clinical Application of Medial Sural Vessels as Recipient Vessels in Repairing Traumatic Tissue Defects in the Lower Limbs:

Evolution and Diversity of Medial Sural Artery Perforator Flap for Hand Reconstruction

The free medial sural artery perforator (MSAP) flap is a recently popularized flap. It has evolved from a composite myocutaneous flap to a pedicled perforator flap for lower limb reconstruction. It is also a versatile free perforator flap for extremity and head and neck reconstruction. The diversity of the flap designs with options for harvest of non-vascularized grafts enhances the versatility for hand and upper limb reconstruction. The adjunctive use of endoscopy and indocyanine green fluorescence imaging studies can assist and demystify the flap anatomy. The authors present their experience using free MSAP flaps for complex mutilated hand and upper extremity reconstruction.

Technical Variables in Lower Extremity Free Flap Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 Lower extremity free flap failure rates are higher than in other areas of the body. While prior studies assessed the effect of intraoperative technical variables, these generally investigated individual variables and did not examine relationships between the many individual technical decisions made during free tissue reconstruction. Our purpose was to investigate the effect of variation in intraoperative microsurgical techniques on flap outcomes in a diverse cohort of patients requiring lower extremity free flap coverage.

METHODS

 Consecutive patients undergoing free flap reconstruction of the lower extremity at two level 1 trauma centers from January 2002 to January 2020 were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes, followed by a review of medical records. Information regarding demographics and comorbidities, indications, intraoperative technical details, and complications was collected. Outcomes of interest included an unplanned return to the operating room, arterial thrombosis, venous thrombosis, partial flap failure, and total flap failure. Bivariate analysis was performed.

RESULTS

 In total, 410 patients underwent 420 free tissue transfers. The median follow-up time was 17 months (interquartile ranges: 8.0-37). Total flap failure occurred in 4.9% (n = 20), partial flap failure in 5.9% (n = 24), and unplanned reoperation in 9.0% (n = 37), with arterial thrombosis in 3.2% (n = 13) and venous thrombosis in 5.4% (n = 22). Overall complications were significantly associated with recipient artery choice, with arteries other than PT and AT/DP having a higher rate (p = 0.033), and with arterial revisions (p = 0.010). Total flap failure was also associated with revision of the arterial anastomosis (p = 0.035), and partial flap failure was associated with recipient artery choice (p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

 Many interoperative options and techniques are available when performing microvascular lower extremity reconstruction that leads to equally high success rates. However, the use of arterial inflow outside of the posterior tibial and anterior tibial arteries leads to a higher overall complication rate and partial flap failure rate. Intraoperative revision of the arterial anastomosis portends poorly for ultimate flap survival.

Sural Artery as a Recipient Vessel for Free Flaps

Introduction The axial vessels like the anterior and posterior tibial emerge as the first choice of recipient vessels, in free flaps for lower limb trauma. When the defects are located more proximally in the leg, the deeper course of the axial vessels makes the dissection more tedious. Alternative vessels like the descending genicular, medial genicular, and distal end of the descending branch of the lateral circumflex femoral can be used for an end-to-end anastomosis, well away from the zone of trauma.

The objective of this study was to define the indications and technique of the use of the sural vessels as the recipient pedicle for proximal and middle third leg defects.

Patients and Methods For the period 2006 to 2022, 18 leg defects following road traffic accidents were covered with latissimus dorsi muscle flap using sural vessels as the recipient pedicle.

Results Among 18 patients, 8 patients had defect in proximal third, 8 had a combined defect in proximal and middle third leg, and 2 had defect in middle third leg. Two patients developed arterial thrombosis and one patient had venous thrombosis for which re-exploration was performed. Two flaps were lost and sixteen had successful wound coverage.

Conclusion The sural vessels as recipient pedicle are easier to access and can be considered as a reliable option for free flaps in limb defects of proximal and middle third leg. Using the submuscular part of the vessel ensures a better distal reach of the flap.

The Medial Sural Artery Perforator Flap: A Historical Trek from Ignominious to “Workhorse”

Rather than just another “review,” this is intended to be an “overview” of the entire subject of the medial sural artery perforator (MSAP) flap as has been presented in the reconstructive literature from its inception in 2001 until the present, with any exceptions not purposefully overlooked. Unfortunately, the pertinent anatomy of the MSAP flap is always anomalous like most other perforator flaps, and perhaps even more variable. No schematic exists to facilitate the identification of a dominant musculocutaneous perforator about which to design the flap, so some adjunctive technology may be highly valuable for this task. However, if a relatively thin free flap is desirable for a small or moderate sized defect that requires a long pedicle with larger caliber vessels, the MSAP flap deserves consideration. Indeed, for many, this has replaced the radial forearm flap such as for partial tongue reconstruction. Most consider the donor site deformity, even if only a conspicuous scar on the calf, to be a contraindication. Yet certainly if used as a local flap for the knee, popliteal fossa, or proximal leg, or as a free flap for the ipsilateral lower extremity where a significant recipient site deformity already exists, can anyone really object that this is not a legitimate indication? As with any perforator flap, advantages and disadvantages exist, which must be carefully perused before a decision to use the MSAP flap is made. Perhaps not a “workhorse” flap for general use throughout the body, the MSAP flap in general may often be a valuable alternative.