Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
Background The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective para...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
2023-06-01
|
| Series: | Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0042-1760092 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| _version_ | 1850217941093580800 |
|---|---|
| author | Sourabh Shankar Chakraborty Ranjit Kumar Sahu Sudeshna Acharya Akhil Dhanesh Goel Manojit Midya Suresh Kotu |
| author_facet | Sourabh Shankar Chakraborty Ranjit Kumar Sahu Sudeshna Acharya Akhil Dhanesh Goel Manojit Midya Suresh Kotu |
| author_sort | Sourabh Shankar Chakraborty |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Background The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective parameters for the sensory recovery, stiffness, cold intolerance, cosmetic outcome, and other complications in the donor fingers, reported in the previous studies, are systematically evaluated.
Methods This systematic review is reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol and was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020213721). Literature search was done using “cross-finger,” “heterodigital,” “donor finger,” and “transdigital” words. Data regarding demography, patients' number and age, follow-up duration and outcomes of donor finger, including 2-point discrimination, range of motion (ROM), cold intolerance, questionnaires, etc. were extracted from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL and risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias tool.
Results Out of the total 16 included studies, 279 patients were objectively evaluated for donor finger morbidity. Middle finger was most frequently used as donor. Static two-point discrimination seemed to be impaired in donor finger in comparison to contralateral finger. Meta-analysis of ROM suggested that statistically there is no significant difference in ROM of interphalangeal joints in donor and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference: −12.10; 95% confidence interval: −28.59, 4.39; I2 = 81%, n = 6 studies). One-third of donor fingers had cold intolerance.
Conclusion There is no significant effect on ROM of donor finger. However, the impairment that seems to be in sensory recovery and aesthetic outcomes needs to be further evaluated objectively. |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj-art-2fef850c38db4501b43cfe6307e0516b |
| institution | OA Journals |
| issn | 0970-0358 1998-376X |
| language | English |
| publishDate | 2023-06-01 |
| publisher | Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd. |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery |
| spelling | doaj-art-2fef850c38db4501b43cfe6307e0516b2025-08-20T02:07:56ZengThieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery0970-03581998-376X2023-06-01560320120710.1055/s-0042-1760092Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-AnalysisSourabh Shankar Chakraborty0Ranjit Kumar Sahu1Sudeshna Acharya2Akhil Dhanesh Goel3Manojit Midya4Suresh Kotu5Department of Burns and Plastic Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Kalyani, Nadia, West Bengal, IndiaDepartment of Burns & Plastic Surgery, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, Odisha, IndiaDepartment of Trauma & Emergency, Burdwan Medical College, BardhamanDepartment of Community Medicine, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Jodhpur, Rajasthan, IndiaPlastic & Reconstructive Surgery Department, Government Medical College, Kota, Rajasthan, IndiaDepartment of Burns and Plastic Surgery, GSL Medical College, Rajahmundry, Andhra Pradesh, IndiaBackground The morbidity of donor finger in a cross-finger flap has not received as much importance as the outcomes of the flap itself. The sensory, functional, and aesthetic morbidity of donor fingers, reported by various authors, are often contradictory to each other. In this study, objective parameters for the sensory recovery, stiffness, cold intolerance, cosmetic outcome, and other complications in the donor fingers, reported in the previous studies, are systematically evaluated. Methods This systematic review is reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol and was registered with the International prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO registration no. CRD42020213721). Literature search was done using “cross-finger,” “heterodigital,” “donor finger,” and “transdigital” words. Data regarding demography, patients' number and age, follow-up duration and outcomes of donor finger, including 2-point discrimination, range of motion (ROM), cold intolerance, questionnaires, etc. were extracted from included studies. Meta-analysis was performed using MetaXL and risk of bias was evaluated using Cochrane risk of bias tool. Results Out of the total 16 included studies, 279 patients were objectively evaluated for donor finger morbidity. Middle finger was most frequently used as donor. Static two-point discrimination seemed to be impaired in donor finger in comparison to contralateral finger. Meta-analysis of ROM suggested that statistically there is no significant difference in ROM of interphalangeal joints in donor and control fingers (pooled weighted mean difference: −12.10; 95% confidence interval: −28.59, 4.39; I2 = 81%, n = 6 studies). One-third of donor fingers had cold intolerance. Conclusion There is no significant effect on ROM of donor finger. However, the impairment that seems to be in sensory recovery and aesthetic outcomes needs to be further evaluated objectively.http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0042-1760092cross-finger flapdonor fingermorbiditysystematic review |
| spellingShingle | Sourabh Shankar Chakraborty Ranjit Kumar Sahu Sudeshna Acharya Akhil Dhanesh Goel Manojit Midya Suresh Kotu Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery cross-finger flap donor finger morbidity systematic review |
| title | Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full | Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_fullStr | Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_full_unstemmed | Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_short | Donor Finger Morbidity in Cross-Finger Flap: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis |
| title_sort | donor finger morbidity in cross finger flap a systematic review and meta analysis |
| topic | cross-finger flap donor finger morbidity systematic review |
| url | http://www.thieme-connect.de/DOI/DOI?10.1055/s-0042-1760092 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT sourabhshankarchakraborty donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT ranjitkumarsahu donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sudeshnaacharya donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT akhildhaneshgoel donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT manojitmidya donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT sureshkotu donorfingermorbidityincrossfingerflapasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |