Добавил:
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз: Предмет: Файл:
Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_1099_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
Скачиваний:
0
Добавлен:
02.09.2026
Размер:
21 Мб
Скачать
1198
Shah et al
40. Hauters P, Cardin JL, Lepere M, et al. Prevention of parastomal hernia by intraper-
itoneal onlay mesh reinforcement at the time of stoma formation. Hernia 2012; 16(6):655–60.
41. Janes A, Cengiz Y, Israelsson LA. Randomized clinical trial of the use of a pros-
thetic mesh to prevent parastomal hernia. Br J Surg 2004;91(3):280–2.
42. Serra-Aracil X, Bombardo-Junca J, Moreno-Matias J, et al. Randomized,
controlled, prospective trial of the use of a mesh to prevent parastomal hernia. Ann Surg 2009;249(4):583–7.
43. Hammond TM, Huang A, Prosser K, et al. Parastomal hernia prevention using a
novel collagen implant: a randomised controlled phase 1 study. Hernia 2008; 12(5):475–81.

Soft Tissue Coverage in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction

Donald P. Baumann, MD, Charles E. Butler, MD
KEYWORDS
Abdominal wall reconstructionHerniaSurgical mesh
Reconstructive surgical proceduresSurgical flaps

KEY POINTS

Soft tissue reconstruction in the abdominal wall requires an algorithmic anatomic
approach based on defect location.
The decision to select a locoregional flap or a free flap is determined by defect surface
area, local donor flap options, and availability of recipient vessels.
Patient systemic comorbidities, locoregional wound conditions, and the possibility of
early/late reoperation must be factored into flap selection.
Reconstruction of complex abdominal wall defects that involve both musculofascial repair
and soft tissue replacement highlight the importance of coordinated collaboration be­tween general surgeons and plastic and reconstructive surgeons.
*
The need for soft tissue coverage in abdominal wall reconstruction suggests a loss of tissue beyond the availability of local tissue to be recruited to resurface the defect. Because most abdominal wall defects can be reconstructed with the redundant tissue usually found in the truncal area of most patients, these defects represent a more complex subset of abdominal wall reconstructions. Indications for flap coverage vary by cause of defect, defect type, and timeline for closure. Multiple clinical sce­narios can lead to a loss of abdominal wall soft tissue requiring replacement including oncologic resection, traumatic injury, radiation-associated wounds, skin necrosis, su­perficial soft tissue infection, and septic evisceration. The amount of soft tissue loss and amount of coverage able to be performed with local skin advancement must be factored into the reconstructive plan. Abdominal wall defects requiring soft tissue coverage can be classified as partial-thickness defects, involving the skin and
Funding Sources: None. Conflict of Interest: None. Department of Plastic Surgery, Unit 1488, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler, Houston, TX 77030, USA * Corresponding author. Department of Plastic Surgery, Unit 1488, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 1400 Pressler, FCT 19.500, Houston, TX 77030.
E-mail address: cbutler@mdanderson.org
Surg Clin N Am 93 (2013) 1199–1209
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.suc.2013.06.005 surgical.theclinics.com
0039-6109/13/$ – see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
1200
Baumann & Butler
subcutaneous tissue only, or full-thickness composite defects, which involve loss of the abdominal wall musculofascia in addition to the overlying skin and subcutaneous tissue. The indications for soft tissue replacement in abdominal wall reconstruction also depend on the chronicity of the wound defect, with some defects benefiting from early soft tissue coverage and others being more appropriate for delayed flap coverage, whereas some defects might be better served with chronic wound care and healing by secondary intention.
In the past, abdominal wounds were treated with wound care and allowed to heal over time by secondary intention, or were reconstructed with a skin graft after the local wound environment was optimized. This approach resulted in a protracted course of care and significant morbidity. In time, the concept of delayed primary closure gained popularity, allowing certain patients with favorable wound characteristics to undergo closure after a short period of a few days instead of being committed to weeks or months of open wound care (Fig. 1).
Soft tissue flap reconstruction offers significant advantages compared with delayed primary or secondary healing wound closure. Flap reconstruction is performed in a single-stage procedure obviating chronic wound management. Flap reconstruction offers immediate and definitive wound closure mitigating the local milieu inflammatory response and local tissue injury. In reconstructions involving bioprosthetic mesh these two factors are critical in that, if the mesh is interposed between two well-vascularized tissue planes (posterior abdominal wall/peritoneal cavity and a soft tissue flap super­ficially), then bilaminar vascular ingrowth can be achieved, accelerating the period of bioprosthetic mesh revascularization and incorporation. In addition, a closed wound environment diminishes the proinflammatory state of an open wound, which limits the degree of enzymatic degradation of the bioprosthetic mesh during the incorpora­tion phase.
Over the last 15 years, negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has revolutionized the approach to wound care, particularly in the abdominal wall. NPWT allows preser­vation of the wound environment by managing fluid losses, decreasing bacterial contamination, and accelerating granulation tissue formation. In abdominal wall reconstruction this preserves the option for delayed closure by flap reconstruction or delayed primary closure.
Planning for flap reconstruction in the abdominal wall must factor defect type, defect location, availability of surrounding soft tissue, and, in certain cases, planned reoperation. Flap reconstructions can be classified by where the tissue is recruited and their blood supplies: local flaps, random or axial; regional flaps, pedicled; and free flaps, microanastomoses.
LOCAL FLAP OPTIONS
Local flaps involve recruiting tissue adjacent to the wound defect. Well-planned inci­sions are critical to preserve blood supply to the local flap and avoid wound healing complications at the donor site used to resurface the wound defect. There are various flap transposition designs available including advancement, rotation/advancement, interpolation, V-Y advancement, and bipedicled flaps. These flaps can be oriented in various dimensions, including vertical, oblique, and horizontal. These flaps are perfused through random or axial blood supplies, so understanding of the vascular anatomy in terms of abdominal wall angiosomes and perforator location is critical to designing robust local flaps.
It is also important to consider the impact of preexisting incisions in the abdominal wall when planning a flap design. A midline laparotomy may preclude harvesting a
Soft Tissue Coverage
1201
Fig. 1. Delayed primary fasciocutaneous flap closure. A 58-year-old man developed anasto-
motic leak after laparoscopic esophagectomy. The patient underwent multiple washouts and was treated as an open abdomen for 2 weeks (A). Abdominal wall closure with inlay bridging bioprosthetic mesh and bilateral component separation was performed and the patient underwent negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) for 2 weeks (B). Next he underwent skin debridement and advancement flap delayed primary closure (C, D). Two­year postoperative computed tomography follow-up (E). (Courtesy of D.P. Baumann, MD, Houston, TX. Copyright Ó 2009 Donald Baumann.)
local flap from the contralateral abdominal wall. However a midline defect bisected by a laparotomy scar can be divided in half and reconstructed by 2 local flaps, one from each hemiabdomen. Another key factor in performing a local flap reconstruction is limiting tension across the wound closure at both the defect site and the donor site. The flap perfusion, especially at the most distal part of the flap, can be compromised
1202
Baumann & Butler
if the flap is placed on high tension either by pushing the limits of the flap design or by creating excessive biaxial tension across the flap when the donor site is closed. One strategy that can be used to mitigate excessive tension is to transpose the flap to cover the defect site and then skin graft the donor site.
For midline defects, a bipedicled flap is generally used for midline defects either unilaterally or bilaterally. The flap is oriented vertically with a minimum of a 3:1 length/width ratio and maintains a blood supply from both the superior and inferior as­pects of the flap.
1
The flap is then directly transposed to resurface the defect and, by design, the donor site cannot be closed without an undue degree of tension. To offload the tension a skin graft is placed on the donor site, preserving blood supply to the distal flap to maximize wound healing. The keystone flap is one strategy to reconstruct large trunk defects (Fig. 2). The keystone flap enables 1-stage resurfacing of the both the defect and donor site. The flap is designed as a large 3:1 ellipse parallel to the long axis of the defect.
2
The blood supply to the flap is based on cutaneous perforators that
shift toward the defect when the flap is advanced. Once the leading edge of the
Fig. 2. Keystone flap. A 24-year-old woman with sarcoma of the upper lateral thigh. (A) The sarcoma has been removed and the resultant defect is marked for keystone island flap repair; note the large defect size. (B–D) The flap is freed and ready for inset without the need for undermining. (E) The redundant inner corners of the flap are marked and trimmed to prevent standing cutaneous deformity. (F) Final opposing V-Y primary closure.
Soft Tissue Coverage
keystone flap is inset the donor site is closed on itself from the poles of the long axis of the flap to the side of the flap remote from the defect. This flap succeeds because of the transposition tension from the advancement and closure being distributed over the long circumference of the flap skin island.

REGIONAL FLAP OPTIONS

In cases in which the defect size exceeds the availability of local soft tissue for coverage, the next option is to consider a regional flap. Regional flaps are pedicled flaps based on a dominant axial blood supply that can be delivered into the abdominal wall to support tissue perfusion in the flap’s new location. Regional pedicled flaps are harvested from adjacent anatomic areas such as the chest, groin, thigh, or back. Pedi­cled flaps can be designed as either fasciocutaneous flaps, myocutaneous flaps, or muscle flaps resurfaced with a skin graft. When selecting a pedicled regional flap it is important to consider the donor morbidity incurred. In addition, not only must the flap’s ability to reach the defect be considered but also how the transferred flap will tolerate the rotational and flexion/extension forces placed on it in the trunk. As an example, because the flap’s pedicle vessels remain in their position of origin, the flap can traverse the groin or flank and have its blood flow compromised by compres­sion or rotation in these areas (Fig. 3). Pedicled regional flap options for abdominal wall reconstruction include latissimus and serratus flaps for upper lateral defects and thigh-based flaps (anterolateral thigh [ALT], vastus lateralis/medialis, and tensor fascia lata [TFL]) for lower abdominal wall defects.
1203

FREE TISSUE TRANSFER

Microsurgical free tissue transfer increases the capacity of the reconstructive surgeon to provide soft tissue coverage for abdominal wall defects that are not amenable to either local or regional flap coverage. Flaps of most sizes, volumes, dimensions, and compositions can be transferred from donor sites remote from the abdominal wall. Although more technically demanding, the evolution of microsurgical techniques enables successful free flap transfer in excess of 98% of cases.
FLAP DONOR SITE OPTIONS
3
There are many free flap donor site options available for abdominal wall reconstruction (Table 1). The torso and thigh are the main areas of flap harvest for defects in the up­per abdominal wall and epigastrium to the suprapubic region. Flaps can be harvested from these donor sites as either pedicled flaps or free flaps. The posterior chest wall donor site yields the latissimus dorsi and serratus anterior muscle flaps. These two flaps can be harvested as muscle flaps or myocutaneous flap designs. In addition, they can be harvested together as a chimeric flap to increase the tissue volume for flap transfer. These flaps can be transposed to the upper epigastrium or subcostal re­gion as a pedicled flap. For defects beyond the reach of the thoracodorsal pedicle the flap can be converted to a free flap and transposed anywhere in the abdominal wall (Fig. 4).
In cases in which a large skin paddle is required for the abdominal wall defect, a free scapular or parascapular flap can be designed on the circumflex scapular branch of the subscapular arterial system. If a latissimus or serratus flap is harvested, the func­tional donor site impact must be considered as it relates to the weakened abdominal wall. In addition, in terms of logistical planning, the patient must undergo a position
1204
Baumann & Butler
Fig. 3. Pedicled anterolateral thigh flap reconstruction of abdominal wall. A 45-year-old woman developed a pelvic abscess with fascial dehiscence after undergoing hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and abdominoperineal resection. She underwent multiple washouts and open-abdomen NPWT management (A). She then underwent exploration and reconstruc­tion with inlay bridging bioprosthetic mesh (B, C). A left-sided anterolateral thigh flap was harvested and pedicled on the descending branch of the lateral femoral circumflex system up into the abdominal defect (D, E). The flap was then partially deepithelized and inset (F). The patient at 4-week follow-up (G). (Courtesy of D.P. Baumann, MD, Houston, TX. Copyright Ó 2011 Donald Baumann.)
change to facilitate flap dissection in the posterior chest wall, which adds complexity and additional time to the procedure.
The thigh represents the mainstay for flap donor sites. Both pedicled flaps for coverage of the infraumbilical abdominal wall and free flaps can be designed in several configurations: fasciocutaneous, myocutaneous, muscle, and chimeric flaps. The descending branch of the lateral circumflex femoral system provides blood supply
Soft Tissue Coverage
Table 1 Abdominal wall flap reconstruction algorithm
Location Regional/Pedicled Flap Free Flap
Epigastric region Latissimus dorsi
Transposition flap (intramuscular perforators)
Periumbilical region External oblique
Bipedicled fasciocutaneous
Hypogastric region External oblique
Bipedicled fasciocutaneous Thigh-based flap TFL
Thigh-based flap Latissimus dorsi
Thigh-based flap Latissimus dorsi
Thigh-based flap Latissimus dorsi
to the vastus lateralis and rectus femoris muscles. The transverse branch of the lateral circumflex femoral system provides blood supply to the TFL muscle. These flaps can be harvested as muscle-only flaps or with overlying skin paddles. The anterolateral thigh flap is designed by including a skin paddle overlying the vastus lateralis muscle and can be designed as a myocutaneous or fasciocutaneous flap. The TFL flap can be designed to include the distal fascia of the iliotibial tract and a smaller proximal skin paddle if needed.
4
The anteromedial thigh flap can be designed on medial perforators from the descending branch of the lateral circumflex femoral system. The rectus fem­oris muscle is most commonly designed as a muscle flap; however, a skin island can be included over the central muscle when appropriately sized cutaneous perforators are present.
These thigh-based flaps can be designed in any combination as chimeric flaps (ie, ALT with anteromedial thigh (AMT) flaps, ALT with TFL, vastus lateralis with TFL). Taken to the extreme, the vastus lateralis, TFL, and the rectus femoris can be har­vested with all overlying skin territory as a subtotal thigh flap for increased volume and skin coverage for massive abdominal wall defects (Fig. 5).
5
1205
RECIPIENT VESSELS
The success of any free tissue transfer relies on the availability of suitable recipient vessels providing arterial inflow and venous outflow to the free flap. There are several recipient vessels available for abdominal wall reconstruction with free flaps. The main vascular axis in the central abdominal wall is the internal mammary/superior epigas­tric/inferior epigastric system. The internal mammary and deep inferior epigastric vessels provide large-caliber recipient vessels of 2-mm to 3-mm diameter for micro­anastomosis. However, the vessels are present at the most cephalad and caudal limits of the abdominal wall. The main challenge for identifying recipient vessels is in the cen­tral aspect of the abdominal wall. In situ options include intramuscular components of the distal superior and inferior epigastric systems or the terminal intercostal branches. However, these vessels are smaller in caliber (1–2 mm) and present more technically challenging microanastomoses. In cases in which the internal mammary-epigastric axis is unavailable the thoracodorsal pedicle reach can be extended into the central abdomen by way of vein grafts.
Recipient vessel options exist beyond the abdominal wall itself. There are several options in the groin based on the superficial femoral system. The superficial inferior epigastric artery, the superficial circumflex iliac artery, and the deep circumflex iliac artery provide vessels of reasonable caliber for free flap transfer to the lower central and lateral abdominal wall. If primary anastomosis is not feasible then vein grafts or vein loops are required. Vein grafts are often harvested from the leg (greater or less
1206
Baumann & Butler
Fig. 4. Free latissimus myocutaneous flap reconstruction of epigastric defect. A 63-year-old patient with metastatic squamous cell carcinoma to abdomen and chest wall. Preoperative view of ulcerated erosive lesion into abdominal cavity. (A) Composite full-thickness resection of the abdominal wall including anterior reflection of diaphragm. Resultant thoracoabdo­minal composite defect. (B) Bioprosthetic mesh inlay bridging repair of the thoracoabdomi­nal defect. (C) Free latissimus myocutaneous flap reconstruction of the epigastrium. Right internal mammary vessels used as recipient vessels. Pedicle tunneled under the lower chest wall skin flap (D, E, F). The patient at 3-week follow-up (G, H). (Courtesy of C.E. Butler, MD, Houston, TX. Copyright Ó 2011 Charles Butler.)
Soft Tissue Coverage
1207
Fig. 5. Bilateral subtotal thigh flap reconstruction of a massive abdominal wall defect (A).
Abdominal wall defect musculofascial reconstruction with bioprosthetic mesh (B). Flap har­vest. Pedicled right subtotal thigh flap included the rectus femoris muscle and a skin paddle of 37 16 cm. Left subtotal thigh flap included the rectus femoris and tensor fasciae latae muscles and a skin paddle of 40 18 cm (C). Flap inset with donor site skin grafts (D). Post­operative view at 10 weeks (E). (Courtesy of C.E. Butler, MD, Houston, TX. Copyright Ó 2009 Charles Butler.)
saphenous vein) or arm (cephalic vein). In addition, in abdominal wall reconstructions with concurrent laparotomy intra-abdominal vessels can be used as recipients if there are no local options in the abdominal wall. The omental and gastroepiploic vessels can be easily mobilized to reach the undersurface of the abdominal wall. Care must be taken in insetting and supporting the flap pedicle so that there is no tension on the anastomoses when the visceral contents shift when the patient transitions from supine to sitting/standing. In addition, the morbidity of reentering the abdominal cavity must be considered if there is a vascular thrombosis. In addition, when bioprosthetic mesh is used for the musculofascial reconstruction as an adjunct to the fascia of the flap the pedicle traverses an aperture in the mesh, compromising the abdominal wall integrity and potentially leading to a hernia defect. For these reasons local recipient options should be explored before intra-abdominal vessels are selected.