Archives of Plastic Surgery

Korean Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한성형외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Donor-Site Morbidity Analysis of Thenar and Hypothenar Flap

  • Dong Chul Lee (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital) ;
  • Ho Hyung Lee (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital) ;
  • Sung Hoon Koh (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital) ;
  • Jin Soo Kim (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital) ;
  • Si Young Roh (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital) ;
  • Kyung Jin Lee (Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Gwangmyeong Sungae General Hospital)
  • Received : 2023.04.16
  • Accepted : 2023.09.01
  • Published : 2024.01.15
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background For the small glabrous skin defect, Thenar and Hypothenar skin are useful donors and they have been used as a free flap. Because of similar skin characteristics, both flaps have same indications. We will conduct comparative study for the donor morbidity of the Free thenar flap and Hypothenar free flap. Methods From January 2011 to December 2021, demographic data, characteristics of each flap, and complications using retrospective chart review were obtained. Donor outcomes of the patient, who had been followed up for more than 6 months, were measured using photographic analysis and physical examination. General pain was assessed by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) score, neuropathic pain was assessed by Douleur Neuropathique 4 Questions (DN4) score, scar appearance was assessed by modified Vancouver Scar Scale (mVSS), and patient satisfaction was assessed on a 3-point scale. Statistical analysis was performed on the outcomes. Results Out of the 39 survey respondents, 17 patients received Free thenar flaps, and 22 patients received Hypothenar free flaps. Thenar group had higher NRS, DN4, and mVSS (p < 0.05). The average scores for the Thenar and Hypothenar groups were 1.35 and 0.27 for NRS, 2.41 and 0.55 for DN4, and 3.12 and 1.59 for mVSS, respectively. Despite the Hypothenar group showing greater satisfaction on the 3-point scale (1.82) compared with the Thenar group (1.47), the difference was not significant (p = 0.085). Linear regression analysis indicated that flap width did not have a notable impact on the outcome measures, and multiple linear regression analysis revealed no significant interaction between flap width and each of the outcome measures. Conclusion Despite the limited number of participants, higher donor morbidity in general pain, neuropathic pain, and scar formation was noted in the Thenar free flap compared with the Hypothenar free flap. However, no difference in overall patient satisfaction was found between the two groups.

Keywords

References

  1. Wu LC, Gottlieb LJ. Glabrous dermal grafting: a 12-year experience with the functional and aesthetic restoration of palmar and plantar skin defects. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005;116(06):1679-1685  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000186662.43997.48
  2. Johansson RS, Westling G. Roles of glabrous skin receptors and sensorimotor memory in automatic control of precision grip when lifting rougher or more slippery objects. Exp Brain Res 1984;56(03):550-564 
  3. Tsai T-M, Sabapathy SR, Martin D. Revascularization of a finger with a thenar mini-free flap. J Hand Surg Am 1991;16(04):604-606  https://doi.org/10.1016/0363-5023(91)90181-A
  4. Pak CS, Jeon JI, Myung Y, et al. Palmar ulnar artery perforator free flap for fingertip reconstruction: anatomical and clinical study. BioMed Res Int 2018;2018:2862879 
  5. Kim KS, Kim ES, Hwang JH, Lee SY. Fingertip reconstruction using the hypothenar perforator free flap. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013;66(09):1263-1270  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2013.05.006
  6. Lee DC, Kim JS, Ki SH, Roh SY, Yang JW, Chung KC. Partial second toe pulp free flap for fingertip reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008;121(03):899-907  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000299945.03655.0d
  7. Sassu P, Lin CH, Lin YT, Lin CH. Fourteen cases of free thenar flap: a rare indication in digital reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2008;60(03):260-266  https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0b013e31806ab39f
  8. Safa B, Lee DC, Park J, et al. Reconstruction of digit soft tissue defects with the fourth common digital artery perforator flap. J Hand Surg Am 2022;47(11):1115.e1-1115.e7  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhsa.2021.09.025
  9. Hwang K, Han JY, Chung IH. Hypothenar flap based on a cutaneous perforator branch of the ulnar artery: an anatomic study. J Reconstr Microsurg 2005;21(05):297-301  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-871770
  10. McLeod GJ, Islur A. donor site scar preference in patients requiring free flap reconstruction. Plast Surg (Oakv) 2020;28(02):88-93  https://doi.org/10.1177/2292550320925922
  11. Yang JW, Kim JS, Lee DC, et al. The radial artery superficial palmar branch flap: a modified free thenar flap with constant innervation. J Reconstr Microsurg 2010;26(08):529-538  https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0030-1262953
  12. Krebs EE, Carey TS, Weinberger M. Accuracy of the pain numeric rating scale as a screening test in primary care. J Gen Intern Med 2007;22(10):1453-1458  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-007-0321-2
  13. Bouhassira D, Attal N, Alchaar H, et al. Comparison of pain syndromes associated with nervous or somatic lesions and development of a new neuropathic pain diagnostic questionnaire (DN4). Pain 2005;114(1-2):29-36  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pain.2004.12.010
  14. Timmerman H, Steegers MAH, Huygen FJPM, et al. Investigating the validity of the DN4 in a consecutive population of patients with chronic pain. PLoS One 2017;12(11):e0187961 
  15. Baryza MJ, Baryza GA. The Vancouver Scar Scale: an administration tool and its interrater reliability. J Burn Care Rehabil 1995;16(05):535-538  https://doi.org/10.1097/00004630-199509000-00013
  16. Brown BC, McKenna SP, Siddhi K, McGrouther DA, Bayat A. The hidden cost of skin scars: quality of life after skin scarring. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2008;61(09):1049-1058  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2008.03.020
  17. Fearmonti R, Bond J, Erdmann D, Levinson H. A review of scar scales and scar measuring devices. Eplasty 2010;10:e43 
  18. Kamei K, Ide Y, Kimura T. A new free thenar flap. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;92(07):1380-1384 
  19. Akita S, Kuroki T, Yoshimoto S, Rikihisa N, Satoh K. Reconstruction of a fingertip with a thenar perforator island flap. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2011;45(06):294-299  https://doi.org/10.3109/2000656X.2011.634549
  20. Omokawa S, Ryu J, Tang JB, Han JS. Anatomical basis for a fasciocutaneous flap from the hypothenar eminence of the hand. Br J Plast Surg 1996;49(08):559-563  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0007-1226(96)90134-4
  21. Colen SR, Shaw WW, McCarthy JG. Review of the morbidity of 300 free-flap donor sites. Plast Reconstr Surg 1986;77(06):948-953  https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-198606000-00013
  22. Harris BN, Bewley AF. Minimizing free flap donor-site morbidity. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 2016;24(05):447-452 https://doi.org/10.1097/MOO.0000000000000286