預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形

李廣學 穆籣 劉巖 臧夢青 劉元波

·論著·

預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形

李廣學1穆籣1劉巖1臧夢青2劉元波2

目的 探討應用預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復燒傷后肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形的臨床效果。方法 回顧性分析2012年6月至2015年6月中國醫學科學院整形外科醫院應用預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復燒傷后肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形患者18例，其中男11例，女7例；左側8例，右側10例。術前患側肘關節活動明顯受限。Ⅰ期手術于患側腹部臍旁埋置擴張器，10～26周(平均18周)完成擴張后Ⅱ期行肘瘢痕切除、攣縮松解，帶蒂臍旁穿支皮瓣轉移覆蓋肘部創面，3周后皮瓣斷蒂。結果 皮瓣大小為16 cm×8 cm～30 cm×14 cm，所有供區直接拉攏縫合。18例皮瓣全部成活，2例皮瓣遠端由于靜脈淤血部分壞死，經換藥處理后傷口愈合，有輕度的瘢痕增生，其他均Ⅰ期愈合。術后隨訪6～38個月(平均19個月)，肘關節功能恢復良好，6例患者進行皮瓣修薄手術。結論 預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣是一種有效的修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形的方法。

肘關節；攣縮畸形；預擴張；臍旁穿支皮瓣

燒傷后肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形是一種較為常見的燒傷畸形，導致肘關節功能下降，影響美觀，嚴重影響患者的生活質量。預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣具有穿支血管恒定，供血范圍大，皮瓣面積大，供區隱蔽等優點。本研究回顧性分析中國醫學科學院整形外科醫院整形十一科應用預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復燒傷后肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形患者18例，并取得了滿意的臨床效果，現報道如下：

資 料 與 方 法

一、一般資料

2012年6月至2015年6月中國醫學科學院整形外科醫院應用預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復燒傷后肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形患者18例，其中男11例，女7例；左側8例，右側10例；年齡4～46歲，平均18.8歲；其中13例熱液燙傷，5例為火焰燒傷，燒傷后6個月至6年，中位時間為13個月。術前患側肘關節活動明顯受限，肘關節周圍無殘留的皮膚供形成局部皮瓣以修復瘢痕攣縮畸形。

二、手術方法

Ⅰ期手術置入擴張器。首先，標記患者肘部瘢痕及攣縮畸形，根據對側肘關節情況及患側攣縮程度估計缺損范圍，皮瓣稍微大于缺損范圍。然后，手持超聲多普勒探測患側肚臍周圍，確定臍旁皮瓣至少包含兩條穿支血管，皮瓣軸線為肚臍到同側肩胛下角連線。皮瓣上緣作為切口置入擴張器，對于女性患者皮瓣上緣在乳房下皺襞以下，切開皮膚、皮下組織至腹外斜肌筋膜，在筋膜表面向下剝離，向中線位置剝離時應避免損傷臍旁的穿支血管，結扎剝離過程中遇到的其他穿支血管，最終在下位肋骨水平及上腹部形成大小合適的腔穴，置入合適的長方形擴張器。置入擴張器大小為300～800 ml，注射壺放置到外側胸壁。術后第14天開始注水，1周1次，適當過度擴張便于取得足夠的皮瓣及直接關閉供區，擴張10～26周，平均18周。

Ⅱ期取出擴張器，肘部攣縮松解、瘢痕切除，臍旁穿支皮瓣帶蒂轉移至肘部。首先再次手持多普勒確認臍旁穿支，透光實驗觀察皮瓣內血管的走形情況，標記皮瓣的范圍，原手術切口作為皮瓣的上緣。手術時首先取出擴張器，一般保留擴張器包膜便于保護皮瓣內血管不受損傷，切取帶蒂臍旁皮瓣，注意術中不必解剖臍旁穿支血管，避免穿支血管的損傷，皮瓣的蒂部稍寬以便包括臍旁穿支血管和皮管的形成。術中充分松解肘關節瘢痕攣縮，將皮瓣遠端轉移至肘部，如有皮瓣富余可以切除周圍部分或全部的瘢痕組織，皮瓣近端形成皮管，留置傷口引流后腹部供區直接關閉，3周后行蒂部夾閉試驗確認皮瓣的血供良好后斷蒂，并可以進一步切除瘢痕以修復缺損。

結 果

擴張器置入術后未出現傷口血腫、感染等并發癥，注水期間未出現擴張器破裂、注射壺滲漏等并發癥。Ⅱ期皮瓣轉移至皮瓣斷蒂后18例皮瓣全部成活，2例皮瓣遠端由于靜脈淤血部分壞死，經換藥處理后傷口愈合，有輕度的瘢痕增生，其他均Ⅰ期愈合。術后隨訪6～38個月，平均19個月，肘關節功能恢復良好，活動良好，外形良好，6例患者進行皮瓣修薄手術。

典型病例：患者，男，7歲。因燒傷后右肘部瘢痕攣縮畸形2年就診。檢查發現：右肘部、右前臂瘢痕攣縮畸形，范圍約13 cm×10 cm，活動明顯受限。Ⅰ期全麻行右側腹部600 ml長方形擴張器置入，術后定期注水，術后5個月全麻下行擴張器取出，右肘部瘢痕攣縮松解、瘢痕切除，范圍為18 cm×12 cm，將臍旁穿支皮瓣轉移到右肘部及右前臂，皮瓣成活良好，無術后并發癥，3周后行皮瓣斷蒂，術后皮瓣全部成活，肘關節活動良好，功能明顯改善，外形良好，效果滿意(圖1～6)。

討 論

肘關節燒傷后瘢痕攣縮畸形通常采用局部整形進行修復，如單純或改良的Z成形及易位皮瓣[1]、雙蒂瘢痕組織瓣[2]、V-Z成形[3]、連續梯形皮瓣成形[4]、改良的八角形推進皮瓣[5]等。雖然局部整形能夠改善肘關節的功能，但是局部瘢痕仍然殘留甚至加重，影響美觀。對于瘢痕攣縮畸形進行充分的松解、切除部分或全部瘢痕，在創面上進行游離皮片移植或皮瓣轉移修復可以減少術后瘢痕的形成。如果患者瘢痕較淺、攣縮較輕，可以選擇皮片游離移植，但是皮片移植后存在色素沉著、皮片收縮等問題，影響術后的功能和美觀要求。如果對術后的功能或美觀要求較高，或者瘢痕累及下方的肌肉、肌腱或骨骼等，則最好選擇皮瓣轉移修復。皮瓣修復可以采用臨近的皮瓣或者遠位的皮瓣進行修復，局部皮瓣可以采用橈動脈近端穿支的島狀脂肪筋膜皮瓣[6]、尺動脈近端穿支的脂肪筋膜皮瓣[7]、遠端蒂臂內側皮神經營養血管皮瓣[8]等，但肘關節周圍的瘢痕攣縮畸形在切除瘢痕、松解攣縮畸形缺損較大時，依靠周圍的局部皮瓣轉移進行修復往往較為困難。因此只有遠位的皮瓣游離移植或帶蒂轉移才能滿足肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形修復對于功能和美觀的雙重要求[9]，司婷婷等[10]報道應用側胸部Ⅱ度燒傷愈合后任意超長皮瓣修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形，雖然對于肘關節功能恢復有一定作用，但是恢復美觀的作用卻有限。

圖1 術前右肘部瘢痕畸形及臍旁穿支皮瓣設計 圖2 右側腹部置入擴張器注水擴張5個月后 圖3 肘部瘢痕攣縮松解、瘢痕切除后

圖4 臍旁穿支皮瓣轉移到右肘部及右前臂 圖5 皮瓣斷蒂拆線后即刻 圖6 術后1年

1983年Taylor等[11]首次提出臍與肩胛下角連線為軸線的皮瓣，稱為延伸的腹壁下動脈穿支皮瓣。之后其他學者將臍旁穿支皮瓣應用于乳房再造[12]和陰囊修復[13]。近年來帶蒂臍旁穿支皮瓣轉移主要應用于手以及前臂缺損的修復[14-16]，因為皮瓣蒂部較短很難用于肘部的修復，而預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣遠端可以到達腋后線位置，長度明顯增加，可以用于肘部缺損的修復，甚至是用于上臂缺損的修復。本研究有6例用于上臂及肘部燒傷后瘢痕攣縮畸形的修復，取得良好的功能和美觀恢復，Zang 等[17]報道應用預擴張的帶蒂臍旁穿支皮瓣修復上肢缺損，取得了良好的效果。

對臍旁皮瓣進行預擴張具有以下優點：(1)可以對皮膚進行充分的擴張，易于取得較大面積的皮瓣，便于供區切口的關閉，減少供區瘢痕增生；(2)擴張器置入的同時能夠結扎皮瓣下方的肋間動脈穿支血管，使得皮瓣內穿支體區之間阻力性吻合和潛力性吻合[18]血管得以開放，起到皮瓣延遲的作用，達到增長皮瓣長度的目的，使得皮瓣的遠端可以達到腋后線位置，便于大范圍缺損的修復；(3)預擴張的臍旁皮瓣使得皮瓣的厚度得以變薄，更能與上肢皮膚厚度相適應，避免部分患者的Ⅱ期皮瓣修薄手術。本文中對于兒童和男性患者修復后不需要Ⅱ期皮瓣修薄，但是對于6例肥胖的女性，由于腹部皮下脂肪較厚，影響術后美觀，需要皮瓣修薄手術。

誠然，應用預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣仍有一定的局限性。(1)整個操作步驟需要3～6個月時間，至少三次手術才能完成；(2)皮瓣切取過長時仍有遠端壞死的可能，需要術中仔細判斷皮瓣血運，及時進行處理；(3)擴張器置入、擴張注水可能發生并發癥，需要進一步處理；(4)皮瓣轉移后需要固定3周后斷蒂，可能出現肩肘僵硬，部分患者尤其是老年患者可能不能耐受。因此，需要嚴格掌握手術適應證，對于大面積的肘關節及周圍缺損的患者推薦采用該手術方式，并在術前對患者進行充分的教育，避免圍手術期并發癥的發生。

綜上所述，預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣能夠充分增加皮瓣的大小，對于選擇合適的大面積肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形患者，能夠起到功能和美觀雙重修復的目的。

[1] Cartotto R, Cicuto BJ, Kiwanuka HN, et al. Common postburn deformities and their management[J]. Surg Clin North Am, 2014, 94(4): 817-837.

[2] 潘勇，盧丙侖，錢洪軍，等.采用雙蒂瘢痕組織皮瓣治療關節部位的瘢痕攣縮畸形[J].中國美容醫學，2007，16(6)：749-751.

[3] 劉宗超，馬川，楊家福，等.V-Z皮瓣成形術矯正上肢關節瘢痕攣縮畸形[J].瀘州醫學院學報，2012，35(6)：612-614.

[4] Grishkevich VM. The post-burn elbow medial flexion scar contracture treatment with trapeze-flap plasty[J]. Burns, 2009, 35(2): 280-287.

[5] Hosny H, El-Shaer W. The eight-limb modified propeller flap--a safer new technique[J]. Burns, 2011, 37(5): 905-909.

[6] El-Khatib HA. Island fasciocutaneous flap based on the proximal perforators of the radial artery for resurfacing of burned cubital fossa[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1997, 100(4): 919-925.

[7] El-Khatib HA, Mahboub TA, Ali TA. Use of an adipofascial flap based on the proximal perforators of the ulnar artery to correct contracture of elbow burn scars: an anatomic and clinical approach[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2002, 109(1): 130-136.

[8] 岳江濤，姚文暾.遠端蒂臂內側皮神經營養血管皮瓣修復肘部瘢痕攣縮11例[J].中華燒傷雜志，2010，26(6)：459-460.

[9] Dehaan MR, Hammond DC, Mann RJ. Controlled tissue expansion of a groin flap for upper extremity Reconstruction[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1990, 86(5): 979-982.

[10] 司婷婷，王一村，宋建星，等.側胸部Ⅱ度燒傷愈合后任意超長皮瓣修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形的研究[J].中國美容醫學，2013，22(5)：511-514.

[11] Taylor GI, Corlett R, Boyd JB. The extended deep inferior epigastric flap: a clinical technique[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 1983, 72(6): 751-765.

[12] Schoeller T, Bauer T, Gurunluoglu R, et al. Modified free paraumbilical perforator flap: the next logical step in breast Reconstruction[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2003, 111(3): 1093-1098; discussion 1099-1101.

[13] Kim KS, Noh BK, Kim DY, et al. Thin paraumbilical perforator-based cutaneous island flap for scrotal resurfacing[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2001, 108(2): 447-451.

[14] Yilmaz S, Saydam M, Seven E, et al. Paraumbilical perforator-based pedicled abdominal flap for extensive soft-tissue deficiencies of the forearm and hand[J]. Ann Plast Surg, 2005, 54(4): 365-368.

[15] O′shaughnessy KD, Rawlani V, Hijjawi JB, et al. Oblique pedicled paraumbilical perforator-based flap for Reconstruction of complex proximal and mid-forearm defects: a report of two cases[J]. J Hand Surg Am, 2010, 35(7): 1105-1110.

[16] Kamath BJ, Verghese T, Bhardwaj P. "Wing flaps": perforator-based pedicled paraumbilical flaps for skin defects in hand and forearm[J]. Ann Plast Surg, 2007, 59(5): 495-500.

[17] Zang M,Zhu S,Song B,et al. Reconstruction of extensive upper extremity defects using pre-expanded oblique perforator-based paraumbilical flaps[J]. Burns, 2012, 38(6): 917-923.

[18] 陳世新，吳東方，丁茂超，等.穿支體區血管及其相互間吻合的3D可視化研究[J].中國臨床解剖學雜志，2011，29(3)：237-242.

(本文編輯：李靜)

李廣學,穆籣,劉巖，等.預擴張的臍旁穿支皮瓣修復肘關節瘢痕攣縮畸形[J/CD]. 中華肩肘外科電子雜志,2016,4(1):24-28.

Reconstruction of elbow scar contracture using pre-expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps

LiGuangxue1,MuLan1,LiuYan1,ZangMengqing2,LiuYuanbo2.

1DepartmentofAestheticSurgery,PekingUniversityPeople′sHospital,Beijing100044,China;2DepartmentofPlasticandReconstructiveSurgery,PlasticSurgeryHospital,Beijing100144,China

Correspondingauthor:LiuYuanbo,Email：ybpumc@sina.com

Background The scar contracture of elbow joint is a common postburn deformity, limiting the joint range of motion, influencing beauty and the patient′s quality of life. For elbow scar contractures, the main surgical treatment is contracture release by removing the scar tissue and covering the defect with sufficient tissue. But it is still highly challenging to restore the functional and aesthetic elbow for large defect. Skin grafting is the simplest option to resurfacing the elbow defect, but it usually lead to poor functional and aesthetic results due to skin contraction and pigmentation. Various types of flaps have been suggested for reconstruction of elbow scar contracture. A Z plasty, V-Y flaps or a transpositional flap technique can be used to release a simple scar contracture. However, local and regional flaps are difficult to restore the large elbow defect after releasing the scar constracture due to the limited available surrounding tissue and limited skin flexibility. Therefore, a distant flap sometimes is needed to reconstruct the extensive defect of the elbow. The anterior truck provide abundant well-pefused flap, such as superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA) flap, intercostal artery flap and perforator-based paraumbilical flaps. However, the usage of these flaps was limited because of insufficient soft tissue when dealing with large defect, thick abdominal portion and limited pedicle length. The pre-expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps overcome these limitations and provide thin, reliable coverage with the best functional and aesthetic results. We present our experience in reconstructing elbow scar contracture using pre-expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps.Methods The elbow scar contracture was corrected in 18 cases with pre-expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps, with 8 cases in the left side and 10 cases in the right side including 11 male cases and 7 female cases. Aged 4 years to 46 years with an average age of 18.8 years. Burn injury causes: 13 cases were injuried with hot liquid and 5 case were flame burns, the median time was 18 months from 6 months to 6 years after burn. Elbow joint movement was obviously limited preoperatively, and there were no abundant skin surrounding the elbow to repair the defect after the scar contracture release.Operative method: During the first-stage procedure, the expander was implanted into the ispilateral normal abdominal subcutaneous tissues. First of all, the elbow scar and contracture deformity was marked, and the extent of the defect after scar contracture release was estimated according to the contralateral elbow joint and the extent of the ispilateral side. The flap for reconstruction was slightly larger than the defect. Then two large perforators were detected in the ipsilateral paraumbilical area with hand-held ultrasound Doppler, the axis of the flap was oriented along the axis between the umbilicus and the ipsilateral inferior angle of scapula. The incision was made at the superior edge of the flap. In women, the incision was made under the inframammary fold to prevent breast deformation. Then, we cut the skin, subcutaneous tissue to the superficial external oblique aponeurosis, stripping down along the fascia. We should carefully dissect medially beyond the lateral border of the rectus abdominis to avoid damage to the main paraumbilical perforators, the perforators encountering during the dissection were ligated with suture or bipolar coagulator. At last, an appropriate pocket was formed between the lower ribs and upper abdomen, a proper rectangular expander was implanted, the size of expander was 300 ml to 800 ml, and the expander valve was put at the lateral chest wall routinely. Expander was begun to inject with normal saline two weeks postoperatively, once a week until enough volume was achieved. The flap was usually over-expanded to obtain sufficient flap and direct closure of the abdominal donor site. The expansion time was 10 weeks to 26 weeks with an average time of 18 weeks. During the second-stage procedure, the expander was removed and the expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps was elevated and transferred to repair elbow skin defect after scar contracture resection and release. The paraumbilical perforators were relocated with hand-held ultrasound Doppler, transillumination test was used to observe the running situation of the flap vessel. The dimension of flap was marked and the previous incision served as the superior edge of the flap. Firstly, the expander was removed with capsule preserving to avoid damaging the underlying perforators. The pedicle was wide enough to include the identified perforators and facilitate the tube formation. However, there was no need to dissect the perforators intraoperatively. The elbow contracture was completely released, the flap transferred to repair elbow skin defect with part or entire scar tissue resection. The proximal part of flap was sutured to form the skin tube. The abdominal donor site was closed directly after wound drainage placement. The pedicle clamping test was done to confirm the good flap blood supply and the pedicle was divided 3 weeks postoperatively. The rest scar was excised and repaired. The extra proximal flap was re-inserted back to the abdominal donor site.Results There were no wound hematoma, infection and other complications after expander implantation. There were no expander rupture, leakage of injection pot and other complications during injection period. The size of expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flaps ranged from 16 cm × 8 cm to 30 cm × 14 cm, and all abdominal donor sites were closed directly. The donor sites were closed directly in all cases. All flaps survived, except for partial necrosis in two cases due to venous congestion, and they healed after dressing change with mild scar hypertrophy. After 6 months to 38 months (mean 19 months) follow-up, the function of elbow joint recovered well postoperatively. Flap debulking was done in 6 cases.Conclusion The pre-expanded perforator-based paraumbilical flap is an effective procedure for elbow joint scar contracture with extensive defect.

Elbow joint;Scar contracture;Pre-expanded;Perforator-based paraumbilical flaps

10.3877/cma.j.issn.2095-5790.2016.01.005

中央高校基本科研業務費專項資金資助(3332013160)

100044北京大學人民醫院醫療美容科1；100144北京，中國醫學科學院整形外科醫院整形十一科2

劉元波，Email：ybpumc@sina.com

2016-01-05)