Since the first description of the cross-finger flap in 1950 for finger injury defect cover, over the last 70 years it has been tremendously explored and has underwent innumerable refinements and modifications. Whether used alone or in combination with other flaps for the reconstruction of finger defects, traumatic or non-traumatic, cross finger flap has proven its worth as a workhorse for finger reconstruction. Despite a handful of innate disadvantages, it has given excellent sensory, functional, and aesthetic outcomes in vast majority of studies. This article has been an attempt to reveal the entire rich journey and inexhaustible history of cross finger flap. With such a grandiose potential, it only seems that the cross finger flap will be continuously evolving over time and keep serving mankind in better ways.
Background Defining cut-off values of flap glucose levels in diagnosing free flap vascular compromise, without taking patients' glucose levels into account, does not hold good in all circumstances, especially in cases of high fluctuations in patients' capillary blood glucose and in diabetic patients. The aim of our study was to establish the role of capillary blood glucose measurements of the flap in relation to patients' fingertip, as an objective tool for postoperative free flap monitoring. Methods A total of 76 free flaps underwent postoperative monitoring with reference test (clinical parameters) and simultaneously with our index test (difference between capillary blood glucose of free flap and the patient), in non-diabetic and diabetic patients. Patients' demography and flap characteristics were also recorded. An ROC curve was plotted to determine diagnostic accuracy and cut-offs of the index test in diagnosing free flap vascular compromise. Results Our Index test has a cut-off value of 24.5 mg/dL with 68.75% sensitivity and 93% specificity, with an accuracy of 91.54%. Conclusion The difference between capillary blood glucose of free flap and the patient is simple, feasible, and inexpensive, and can be done by any health care professional and does not require any specialized facilities or training. It has an excellent diagnostic accuracy to detect impending free flap vascular compromise, especially in non-diabetics. Although in diabetics, this test becomes less accurate. Being an observer-independent objective test, the difference in capillary blood glucose of patient and flap measurement can be used as a highly reliable tool for postoperative free flap monitoring.
In this report, we discuss the excision of a large congenital nevus covering the nose and face and the reconstruction of the defect using an expanded forehead flap, in a 24-year-old man. We observed that after incorporating specific modifications including tissue expansion, thinning of the distal part of the flap, and placing the pedicle over the cutaneous branch of the supratrochlear artery, we were able to provide excellent aesthetic results using this time-tested paramedian forehead flap for nasal reconstruction. After we inset the flap, there was negligible donor site morbidity during a 33-month follow-up period.
Background: The standard (dorsal) cross-finger flap (CFF) is one of the common flaps used for fingertip reconstruction. There is little consensus regarding the sensory outcomes associated with this flap. In this systematic review, we evaluated objective sensory outcome parameters of patients who underwent CFF reconstruction. Methods: This systematic review is reported using the PRISMA protocol and was registered with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews. Literature search was done using the terms ‘cross-finger flap’, ‘heterodigital’, ‘finger-tip’ and ‘transdigital’. Data regarding the number of patients, follow-up duration and sensory outcomes, including 2-point discrimination (2-PD) were extracted from included studies. The analysis was performed using Microsoft Excel with MetaXL add-in software. Certainty assessment and summary of findings table was created using GRADEpro GDT. Results: This review includes 14 studies with 301 patients. We found a statistically significant difference in static 2-PD of recipient and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference [WMD]: 1.66; 95%CI: 0.03, 3.29; p = 0.00; I2=92%, n = 7 studies). Conclusions: Dorsal CFF reconstruction for fingertip defect does not provide adequate sensory recovery. Level of Evidence: Level III (Therapeutic)
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. There is no information (names, initials, hospital identification numbers, or photographs) in the submitted manuscript that can be used to identify patients.All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2008 (5).
Background The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective parameters for the sensory recovery, stiffness, cold intolerance, cosmetic outcome, and other complications in the donor fingers, reported in the previous studies, are systematically evaluated. Methods This systematic review is reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol and was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020213721). Literature search was done using “cross-finger,” “heterodigital,” “donor finger,” and “transdigital” words. Data regarding demography, patients' number and age, follow-up duration and outcomes of donor finger, including 2-point discrimination, range of motion (ROM), cold intolerance, questionnaires, etc. were extracted from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL and risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Out of the total 16 included studies, 279 patients were objectively evaluated for donor finger morbidity. Middle finger was most frequently used as donor. Static two-point discrimination seemed to be impaired in donor finger in comparison to contralateral finger. Meta-analysis of ROM suggested that statistically there is no significant difference in ROM of interphalangeal joints in donor and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference: −12.10; 95% confidence interval: −28.59, 4.39; I2 = 81%, n = 6 studies). One-third of donor fingers had cold intolerance. Conclusion There is no significant effect on ROM of donor finger. However, the impairment that seems to be in sensory recovery and aesthetic outcomes needs to be further evaluated objectively.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.