The Optimal Period of the Pedicles Implantation for the Patent Vasculature in the Prefabricated Periosteofascial Flap through the Vascular Pedicles Transfer

혈관조직의 전위를 이용한 선조작 골건막피판의 제작 시 안정된 혈관화를 위한 적절한 혈관경 이식기간

  • Kim, Seo Hyun (Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Kim, Sang Bum (Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Korea University) ;
  • Lee, Byung Il (Department of Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, Korea University)
  • 김세현 (고려대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실) ;
  • 김상범 (고려대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실) ;
  • 이병일 (고려대학교 의과대학 성형외과학교실)
  • Received : 2005.03.03
  • Published : 2005.05.10

Abstract

This study was designed to investigate the optimal period of pedicles implantation in the prefabricated periosteofascial flap using a vascular tissue transfer. Flap prefabrication was prepared with a transposition of the central pedicles of right auricle on the calvarium of the New Zealand white rabbit. Thirty flaps were divided into five groups of six flaps, including control group (group I) of the conventional periosteofascial flap based on the right lateral border of parietal bone. The prefabricated flap was elevated as a $2{\times}2cm$ sized island flap and reposed in place in 1, 2, 3, and 4 weeks after the pedicles transfer in groups II, III, IV, and V, respectively. Five days after flap repositioning, the flap viability and vascularity were evaluated with microangiography and histological study quantitatively. The flap survival was increased in accordance with the implanted period of the pedicle. New vessels developed around the implanted pedicle in the 2nd week, and overall vascularization of the flap was accomplished in the 3rd week. The flap with 4 weeks of implantation period, however, showed the same survival rate as the control group. In conclusion, prefabricated periosteo- fascial flap can be created with a vascular tissue transfer, and the optimal duration of the pedicle implantation is more than 4 weeks to obtain adequate flap survival.

Keywords

References

  1. Khouri RK, Upton J, Shaw WW: Principles of flap prefabrication. Clin Plast Surg 19: 763, 1992
  2. Abbase EH A, Shenaq SM, Spira M, EI-Falaky MH: Prefabricated flap: Experimental and clinical review. Plast Reconstr Surg 96: 1218, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199510000-00036
  3. Shen TY: Vascular implantation into skin flap: Experimental study and clinical application: A preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 68: 404, 1981
  4. Pribaz JJ, Fine N, Orgill DP: Flap prefabrication in the head and neck: A 10-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 103: 808, 1999 https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-199903000-00006
  5. Erol OO, Spira M: Development and utilization of a composite island flap employing omentum: Experimental investigation. Plast Reconstr Surg 64: 405, 1980
  6. Lee BI: Neo- and Re-vascularization in the prefabricated cutaneous flap using vascular pedicles implantation. J Korean Microsurgery Soc 11: 125, 2002
  7. Tark KC, Khouri RK, Shin KS, Shaw WW: The fasciovascular pedicle for revascularization of other tissues. Ann Plast Surg 26: 149, 1991 https://doi.org/10.1097/00000637-199102000-00007
  8. Lee HY, Wee SS, Lim P: The effect of perivascular tissues on survival of prefabricated Haps in rats. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr 22: 991, 1995
  9. Kostakoglu N, Manek S, Green, CJ: The development of neovascularisation in flap prefabrication with vascular implantation: an experimental study. Br J Plast Surg 50: 428, 1997 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(97)90330-1
  10. Yajima H, Tarnai, S, Ishida H, Kisanuki O: Prefabricated vascularized periosteal grafts using fascial flap transfers. J Reconstr Microsurg 11: 201, 1995 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2007-1006533
  11. Schmitz JP, Hollinger JO: The critical size defect as an experimental model for craniomandibulofacial nonunions. Clin Orthap 205: 299, 1986