الفهرس 
IntroductionOnly 14 pages are availabe for public view
 |  | from | 145 |  |  |
| | | from | 145 | | |
Abstract
The dorsal ulnar artery based flap was first described by Becker and Gilbert in 1988. The main trunk of the pedicle of this flap is the dorsal ulnar artery (DUA) which arises from the ulnar artery at a distance of about 4 cm proximal to the pisiform. The dorsal ulnar flap can be raised either fascial or fasciocutaneous flap.
The pedicled dorsal ulnar artery based flap has several advantages as: Flap harvesting is pretty straight forward, no flexor tendons are exposed, a major artery is not sacrificed, the donor site scar is well covered on the medial side of the forearm; hidden side; the skin is less hairy with decreased fat. Also, it is a local flap, quick, easy to manage and aesthetically good. It is based on one or occasionally two perforators. The flap is distally based which imports undamaged tissue into the primary defect and allows secondary defect closure easily. Islanding the flap facilitates the arc of rotation and avoids the pedicle kink when the flaps are turned 180º and allows more distal reach of the flap, it therefore allows easier inset and has a better contour.
There were some drawbacks with this flap as its short pedicle and its relatively limited arc of rotation, mild congestion & edema which were subsided over the time.
Dorsal ulnar artery based flap, with the adipofascial pedicle, can be taken either as a fascial flap or as a fasciocutaneous flap and it gives greater mobility, with a good arc of rotation, so reaching more far distally in the hand and it permits an easier flap transfer without any noticeable contour abnormalities at the base of the flap.
In our study we found that success rate was higher with fascial flaps more than with fasciocutaneous flaps. Also harvesting of a fascial flap reduced the overall morbidity without causing additional skin loss. So, we prefer usage of the fascial flaps especially in covering of a large defect of dorsal and palmar aspects of the hand.
The number of cases used in this study was not enough to produce a statistical conclusion. So, we acknowledge that some statistical variations may be more apparent if we were to repeat this study with more cases.