[Is muscle the best coverage for leg Gustilo IIIb fractures? A retrospective comparative study]

Well-vascularized muscle flaps have been the traditional gold standard for coverage of open fracture of the lower extremity. The last 15 years have brought the fasciocutaneous and perforator flaps and raised the issue of the type of coverage required for open fracture of the lower extremity. In recent years, in selected compromised patient, we have been using nonmuscular flaps for reconstruction. The goal of this study is to compare the results of fasciocutaneous reconstruction to those of classical muscular flaps.

A comparative retrospective study, including all patients from 2002 to 2006 requiring a coverage of a Gustillo III b fracture of the lower extremity, is done. The type of flaps, the fracture localization, the infection rate, the time required for consolidation of the fracture and the complication rate are reviewed. An independent university laboratory verified the statistical analysis.

Twenty patients have experienced coverage by muscular flaps and 18 by fasciocutaneous flaps. We found a skin fistula and a chronic infection in the muscular-flap group, and two skin fistulae in the fasciocutaneous flaps group. The overall surgical results were comparable, except the bony union delay shorter in the fasciocutaneous flaps group.

Muscle coverage is not mandatory to cover bone in the lower leg. The fasciocutaneous flaps can provide a good alternative for muscle-flap coverage. There is no significant difference as far as consolidation and infection are concerned, between the coverage by muscular or fasciocutaneous flaps.