© 2010 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Microsurgery 30:509–516, 2010. “
“Multiple soft tissue finger defects in different shapes and locations are usually difficult to manage. Such defects commonly involve tendons and bones. Palmar soft tissue defects may also lead to vascular compromise. In this retrospective report,

we report the results of seven patients with multiple soft tissue finger defects that were covered by syndactylizing arterialized venous flaps. Six of the patients suffered hot-pressing buy Silmitasertib machine and crushing injuries, one patient had a rolling belt injury. All patients presented with soft tissue defects on palmar or dorsal sides involving at least two digits. The palmar forearm was donor site for all patients. At least one afferent artery and two efferent veins were selected for the anastomosis. Lengths of afferent and efferent veins were long enough to perform healthy anastomosis outside the injury zone. The afferent vessels were anastamosed to the digital arteries with the largest possible diameter or to the common digital arteries to maximize flow. The efferent veins were anastamosed to dorsal veins. Separations of the digits were performed

after three weeks by longitudinal incisions. The mean follow-up period was 12 months. None of our patients suffered MLN8237 a flap loss. Syndactylizing arterialized venous flaps may be used for composite or single

tissue reconstruction for multiple finger defects with satisfactory cosmetic and functional outcomes. © 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Microsurgery 34:527–534, 2014. “
“This article aims to investigate the critical role of Calpain the venous-perforator in the decision-making process of choosing the best suitable perforator-complex in a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. Forty consecutive DIEP breast reconstructions were pre-operatively evaluated by CT-Angiography to identify the dominant and centrally located abdominal wall perforators. The CTA results were used as a guide to conduct a Color-Duplex-Ultrasound examination that was mainly focused on investigating the accompanying venous-perforator. In group-A (n = 20) perforator-complex selection was based on the size of the arterial-perforator, whilst in group-B (n = 20) it was based on the size of the venous-perforator. All single perforator-complex DIEP flaps survived. No significant differences were recorded concerning the size of arterial-perforator between the two groups; however the size of venous-perforator was significantly larger in group-B (P < 0.05). In group-A, four flaps showed vascular compromise intraoperative that was salvaged by flap supercharge with the superficial inferior epigastric system. In contrast, in group-B, all flaps were re-vascularized uneventfully (P < 0.05).