{Reference Type}: Systematic Review
{Title}: Anatomy, surgical techniques, and clinical outcomes for the medial arm flap: A systematic review.
{Author}: Tweel M;Dow T;Greene B;Leblanc M;
{Journal}: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
{Volume}: 92
{Issue}: 0
{Year}: 2024 May 7
{Factor}: 3.022
{DOI}: 10.1016/j.bjps.2024.02.060
{Abstract}: <B>BACKGROUND: </B>The medial arm flap (MAF) has been used as a pedicle flap and free flap to reconstruct various deformities, including those of the head and neck, axilla, elbow, chest, and hand. This study reviews the anatomy of the flap, the technique of flap harvest, its clinical applications, and a systematic review of the current published literature.<BR><B>METHODS: </B>An online systematic review of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, and The Cochrane Library from inception to September 30, 2023, was completed. Studies that investigate the anatomy, technique or clinical outcomes of medial arm flaps were included. Clinical data extracted includes patient, defect, flap characteristics, complications, and take-back procedures. Anatomic data extracted includes anatomical variations, and vascular characteristics and patterns.<BR><B>RESULTS: </B>Between 1980 and 2023, 50 papers were published outlining the medial arm flap. Anatomic studies detail the anatomy of 384 medial arms, and outcomes are reported for 283 MAFs (75 free flaps and 208 pedicle flaps). The superior ulnar collateral artery is most commonly cited as the dominant arterial supply to the middle third of the medial arm. The majority of patients required reconstruction post-burn (39.2%), trauma (17.7%), and tumor excision (12.4%). MAFs were mostly used to reconstruct defects of the head and neck (41.7%), the hand and wrist (21.9%), and the elbow (16.3%). Eleven flaps (4.1%) suffered partial flap failure, and two flaps (0.7%) suffered total flap failure.<BR><B>CONCLUSIONS: </B>This manuscript demonstrates that the MAF is a reliable and underutilized flap option with a well-hidden donor scar and a low complication rate.