File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Is distal fibular fracture an absolute contraindication to free fibular flap harvesting? A review of evidence in the literature and illustration by a successful case

TitleIs distal fibular fracture an absolute contraindication to free fibular flap harvesting? A review of evidence in the literature and illustration by a successful case
Authors
Issue Date2015
Citation
Microsurgery, 2015, v. 35, n. 1, p. 60-63 How to Cite?
Abstract© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Despite the advantages of a fibula flap, many surgeons would often be hesitant in its use in patients with a history of distal fibular fracture. The chief concern is the potential vascular damage sustained during the injury. From our experience, however, we noticed that the blood supply of various components of a fibula flap rarely relies on its distal part alone. Avoiding the use of this flap may unnecessarily forgo the optimal reconstructive option in many patients. Free fibula flap was harvested from a 41-year-old man who had a history of left fibula fracture 10 years before surgery. The fracture was treated with open reduction with internal fixation. The plate was removed 1 year after the trauma surgery. We used this fractured and healed fibula to reconstruct the intraoral and mandibular defect after tumor extirpation. The harvesting process was straight-forward and the flap survived uneventfully. On the basis of our experience and current evidence in the literature, we believe that a history of previous fibular fracture should not be considered as an absolute contraindication for free fibular flap harvesting. With a good knowledge of the lower limb anatomy and appropriate patient selection, the fibular flap can still be a safe option that incurs no additional risk.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/230973
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 2.054
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.392

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChan, Richie Chiu Lung-
dc.contributor.authorWei, Fu Chan-
dc.contributor.authorWong, Jason Kin Fai-
dc.contributor.authorWu, Chao Min-
dc.date.accessioned2016-09-01T06:07:17Z-
dc.date.available2016-09-01T06:07:17Z-
dc.date.issued2015-
dc.identifier.citationMicrosurgery, 2015, v. 35, n. 1, p. 60-63-
dc.identifier.issn0738-1085-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/230973-
dc.description.abstract© 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.Despite the advantages of a fibula flap, many surgeons would often be hesitant in its use in patients with a history of distal fibular fracture. The chief concern is the potential vascular damage sustained during the injury. From our experience, however, we noticed that the blood supply of various components of a fibula flap rarely relies on its distal part alone. Avoiding the use of this flap may unnecessarily forgo the optimal reconstructive option in many patients. Free fibula flap was harvested from a 41-year-old man who had a history of left fibula fracture 10 years before surgery. The fracture was treated with open reduction with internal fixation. The plate was removed 1 year after the trauma surgery. We used this fractured and healed fibula to reconstruct the intraoral and mandibular defect after tumor extirpation. The harvesting process was straight-forward and the flap survived uneventfully. On the basis of our experience and current evidence in the literature, we believe that a history of previous fibular fracture should not be considered as an absolute contraindication for free fibular flap harvesting. With a good knowledge of the lower limb anatomy and appropriate patient selection, the fibular flap can still be a safe option that incurs no additional risk.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.relation.ispartofMicrosurgery-
dc.titleIs distal fibular fracture an absolute contraindication to free fibular flap harvesting? A review of evidence in the literature and illustration by a successful case-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.description.natureLink_to_subscribed_fulltext-
dc.identifier.doi10.1002/micr.22252-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-84921726633-
dc.identifier.volume35-
dc.identifier.issue1-
dc.identifier.spage60-
dc.identifier.epage63-
dc.identifier.eissn1098-2752-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats