改良菱形皮瓣和旋转皮瓣修复面部缺损的效果比较

MODIFIED RHOMBOID FLAP VERSUS ROTATION FLAP IN RECONSTRUCTION OF FACIAL DEFECT

目的探讨改良菱形皮瓣和旋转皮瓣修复面部皮肤缺损的优缺点。方法选取中等大小面积面部缺损病人78例,随机分为两组,分别应用改良菱形皮瓣(46例)和旋转皮瓣(32例)修复,比较两组皮肤缺损的面积、切口长度、术后满意度评分。结果两组皮瓣修复面部皮肤缺损面积差异无显著性(t=0.855,P>0.05);旋转皮瓣组皮瓣切口长度明显大于改良菱形皮瓣组,差异有显著性(t=10.710,P<0.05);两组皮瓣修复术后随诊总满意度比较差异无显著性(χ2=0.022,P>0.05)。但在颧颊部皮肤缺损的修复上旋转皮瓣组术后满意度高于改良菱形皮瓣组(t=2.870,P<0.05)。结论改良菱形皮瓣和旋转皮瓣均是修复面部中等大小皮肤缺损的有效方法,在颧颊部皮肤缺损的修复上应以旋转皮瓣为首选。

Objective To observe the advantages and disadvantages of modified rhomboid flap （MRF） and rotation flap （RF） in repairing facial cutaneous deficiency. Methods Seventy-eight patients with moderate-area defect of the face were ran domized to MRF group （46 cases） andRFgroup （32 cases）. Acomparison between the two groups was carried out in terms of the area of cutaneous deficiency of the face, the length of the incision, and the score of postoperative satisfaction. Results The difference of the area repaired between the two groups was not significant （t=0. 8551 ,P2〉0.05）. The length of ineisal opening was longer in RF group than that in MRF （t= 10. 710, P〈0.05）. No significant difference was noted regarding the satisfication be tween the two groups （X2 =0. 022,P〉0.05）, but in the repair of zygomatic and cheek skin, the score of satisfaction in RF group was higher than that in MRF group （t=2. 870 ,P〈0.05）. Conclusion Both MRF and RF are effective for the reconstruction of moderate skin defect of the face, but for that on zygomatic cheek region, RF should be the first choice.