English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

This paper presents the scheme to select alternative flaps limited to the region of the ipsilateral thigh when the perforator of the anterolateral thigh flap is not feasible. Total of 564 consecutive microsurgery cases using anterolateral thigh perforator flap was reviewed from March of 2001 to January of 2009. Total of 12 cases used a contingent flap due to anatomical and technical complications of the anterolateral thigh perforator. The alternatives were skin perforator flaps adjacent to the initial flap (3 cases of upper anterolateral thigh flap, 4 cases of anteromedial thigh flap), vastus lateralis muscle flap with skin graft (2 cases), and anterolateral thigh flap as septocutaneous flap without a prominent perforator on the septum (3 cases). All flaps survived and provided coverage as planned but one case using septocutaneous flap without a prominent perforator was noted with partial necrosis. Adjacent flaps around the anterolateral thigh perforator flap may provide useful alternative flaps in cases of failed elevation. Limiting the contingent secondary flap to this region may reduce further donor site morbidity and still provide an adequate flap for reconstruction.

Alternative Regional Flaps When Anterolateral Thigh Flap Perforator is not Feasible