# Re-Vision of Geometric Flap Design in Lower Limb Reconstruction: A Comparative Analysis on Perforator Enhancement

## TL;DR

This study shows that adding perforators to geometric flap designs in lower limb reconstruction improves outcomes compared to random flaps.

## Contribution

The study quantifies how perforator-enhanced geometric flaps improve flap size and reduce complications in lower limb reconstruction.

## Key findings

- Perforator-enhanced flaps had significantly larger sizes and better length-to-width ratios than random flaps.
- The GP group showed a reduced rate of complications compared to the GR group.
- No significant difference in complication rates was found between GP and PP flaps.

## Abstract

Background: Perforator flaps improved the reconstruction paradigm in the lower extremity, increasing coverage possibilities. This study aims to quantify how added perforators could enhance standard geometrical patterns (compared to random flaps). Methods: A total of 29 cases of lower limb soft tissue reconstruction (STR)—52% trauma, 21% osteomyelitis with skin fistulas, 21% healing disorders with unstable scarring and 6% cancer-related surgery—were performed in our institution between 2012 to 2023 with geometric random (GR) local flaps (34%), geometric perforator-enhanced (GP) flaps (32%) or pure propeller perforator (PP) flaps (34%), were retrospectively analysed. Patients with proximal thigh defects, a follow up of less than 3 months and those who received an axial, muscle or free flap were excluded. Geometric patterns (as length:width ratio (L:W)) were compared among groups, analysing healing outcomes and complications. Results: Leg defects were categorized into 62% distal, 14% middle, 14% proximal third and 10% distal thigh. No significant difference in defect size was detected among groups. Mean flap size was significantly larger for GP (70.5 cm2, (p < 0.05)) and PP (74.4 cm2, (p < 0.01)) than GR (53.7 cm2). The L:W ratio was significantly higher in GP (L:W 2.2:1, (p < 0.05)) and PP (L:W 2.8:1, (p < 0.01)) than in GR (1.5:1), but no significant difference was found between GP and PP. A reduced complications rate (partial flap loss, infection, healing, revision surgery, etc.) was observed in the GP group, when compared to GR. Conclusions: Flap geometric design can be significantly improved by the inclusion of perforators, maintaining spatial advantages with larger ductility and improved vascular solidity.