The esthetic outcome of recipient sites of gracilis muscle flaps versus anterolateral thigh flaps: A retrospective study

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundAnterolateral thigh (ALT) and gracilis muscle flaps have been described as comparable reconstructive options regarding maximal flap dimension and indications. However, split‐thickness skin‐grafted muscle flaps are generally believed to be inferior to perforator flaps regarding the esthetic outcome of the recipient site. The purpose of this study was to challenge this assumption, comparing the long‐term esthetic outcome of the gracilis and the ALT flap.MethodsOne hundred forty‐eight patients who had undergone free flap reconstruction with either free split‐thickness skin‐grafted gracilis muscle flaps (n = 86) or ALT flaps (n = 62) were evaluated in the study. Patients' satisfaction with the esthetic outcome, rates of flap loss, wound healing disorders and the necessity for thinning the flap or scar correction procedures were assessed.ResultsFlap loss occurred in 4 of 86 gracilis flaps (4.7%) and 2 of 62 (3.2%) ALT flaps (p > .9999). Thinning or scar correction procedures were necessary for 6 of 86 gracilis (7.0%) and 4 of 62 (6.5%; p > .9999) ALT flap recipient sites. Regarding the overall patients' satisfaction with the esthetic outcome, scores were similar in both groups (2.667 [ALT] vs. 2.348 [gracilis]; p = .3739). Contour deformity, scar hypertrophy, and difference in flap color/texture in relation to the surrounding skin were comparable throughout the ALT and gracilis group (2.667 vs. 2.174, p = .2099; 3.333 vs. 2.739, p = .0912 and 2.500 vs. 2.174, p = .3159, respectively).ConclusionThe gracilis and ALT flap are two equivalent reconstructive options regarding the esthetic outcome of the recipient site and long‐term patient satisfaction.