A single-center retrospective comparison of muscle versus cutaneous free flaps for posterior elbow defect reconstruction

Abstract

IntroductionComparative data regarding free flap outcomes for elbow defect reconstruction is still lacking. This study aims to compare complication rates of free muscle (MFs) versus cutaneous flaps (CFs) for posterior elbow reconstruction. MethodsIn a single-center retrospective analysis, patients with free MFs and CFs for posterior elbow reconstruction from 2000 until 2021 were analyzed. Retrospective chart review included patient demographics, operative details, and postoperative complications. Compared outcomes of interest were microvascular complications, partial or total flap necroses, wound dehiscence, hematoma or flap infection, and donor-site complications. ResultsSixty-six free flaps (CFs: n=42; MFs: n=24) were included, with a trend over time towards using CFs (64%). MFs were used for larger defects (CF: 175 ± 82 vs MF: 212 ± 146 cm2; p=0.13). Outcome analysis revealed an equal distribution of microvascular complications (10% vs 13%; p=0.7), partial flap necrosis (7% vs 8%; p>0.9), wound dehiscence (7% vs 4%; p>0.9), evacuation of hematoma (10% vs 4%; p = 0.7), and infection (0% vs 4%; p = 0.4). Total flap necrosis requiring additional flap surgery was necessary in one CF (2%) and in no MF (0%) (p>0.9). ConclusionSurgical outcomes, flap necrosis rates, and microsurgical complications did not differ between CFs and MFs. Both flap types are safe and effective options. The free anterolateral thigh and latissimus dorsi flaps represent indispensable workhorses for the reconstruction of extensive elbow defects.