Clinical Outcomes and Flap Survival of Freestyle Perforator Flaps for Lower-Limb Traumatic Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Mapping of the Available Evidence
Main Article Content
Abstract
Freestyle perforator flaps—propeller and perforator-based V-Y advancement flaps raised on an intraoperatively or radiologically identified perforator—are increasingly used for post-traumatic lower-limb reconstruction, but their consolidated outcome profile is unmapped. Following PRISMA 2020 and prospective PROSPERO registration CRD420261422030, Data Search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and Scopus abasesusing a predefined PICOS framework. Human studies (≥5 patients) of freestyle/pedicled perforator flaps for traumatic lower-limb defects reporting flap survival or complications were eligible; synthesis was narrative.
Of 1,000 records, 40 underwent full-text review and 7 were included. None studied freestyle perforator flaps in lower-limb trauma directly; all were secondary syntheses of adjacent techniques. Reported survival/success ranged from 78.8% (reverse sural flap) to 98% with 0% total loss (Color-Doppler-guided pedicled perforator flaps); free flaps achieved 92–94% versus 86–90% for local flaps. Overall complications were 14.8–21.2%; venous congestion predominated, and coverage within 72 hours reduced osteomyelitis (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.16–0.49). This systematic review provides the first consolidated map of perforator-based flap survival relevant to traumatic lower-limb reconstruction and delivers clinically actionable findings. Across the closest available evidence, perforator-based and comparator flaps achieved consistently high survival—up to 98% reconstructive success with 0% total flap loss for preoperatively mapped (Color-Doppler-guided)
Article Details

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
References
I. Koshima I, Soeda S. Inferior epigastric artery skin flaps without rectus abdominis muscle. Br J Plast Surg. 1989;42(6):645-648.
II. Wei FC, Mardini S. Free-style free flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(4):910-916.
III. Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372:n71.
IV. Page MJ, Moher D, Bossuyt PM, et al. PRISMA 2020 explanation and elaboration. BMJ. 2021;372:n160.
V. Shea BJ, Reeves BC, Wells G, et al. AMSTAR 2: a critical appraisal tool for systematic reviews. BMJ. 2017;358:j4008.
VI. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924-926.
VII. Chorna V, Nazarenko A, Tsapenko VI, et al. Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of the reverse sural flap in the reconstruction of distal defects of the lower extremity in the world and Ukraine. Trauma. 2026. doi:10.22141/1608-1706.1.27.2026.1063
VIII. Ibrahim RM, Gunnarsson G, Akram J, Sørensen JA, Thomsen J. Color Doppler ultrasonography targeted reconstruction using pedicled perforator flaps—a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Plast Surg. 2018. doi:10.1007/s00238-018-1435-y
IX. Dehnadi S, Pérez R, Yu MZ, et al. Timing of flap coverage in open fractures: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cureus. 2026. doi:10.7759/cureus.107338
X. Scampa M, Mégevand V, Suvà D, Kalbermatten D, Oranges CM. Free versus pedicled flaps for lower limb reconstruction: a meta-analysis of comparative studies. J Clin Med. 2022;11(13):3672.
XI. Suliman O, Almehmadi M, Alraddadi D, et al. Comparative outcomes of free flap versus local flap reconstruction in post-traumatic lower limb defects following orthopaedic fixation: a meta-analysis. Int J Community Med Public Health. 2026. doi:10.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20260031
XII. Vaillant C, Berkane Y, Lupon E, et al. Outcomes and reliability of perforator flaps in the reconstruction of hidradenitis suppurativa defects: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Med. 2022;11(19):5813.
XIII. Yang J, Qin X, Hou L, Liu Y. Risk prediction models for complications after flap repair surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Surg. 2025. doi:10.1186/s12893-025-03072-8