Evidence Hub

Standardization of the Rat Dorsal Random Pattern (McFarlane) Flap Model and Evaluation of the Pharmacological Agents Aiming to Salvage Partial Flap Necrosis: A Systematic Review and a Meta-analysis

Üstün GG, Öztürk S, Koçer U

Annals of plastic surgery, 2021

13 citations

Abstract

Introduction: Partial flap necrosis is a common complication after surgery. McFarlane flap model has been used for assessment of various agents' effects on random flap survival. The aim of this study was to review the methodology of studies using this flap model and reveal the most successful agents.

Materials and methods: PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were screened for words "McFarlane flap," "flap survival," and ("flap" and "rat") by using time limits between 1965 and 2019. A total of 71 original articles were reviewed. Dimensions and base (cranial/caudal) of the flap, treatment protocol, follow-up period, and survival rates were extracted. Modified survival rates were calculated. Coefficients of variation of cranial/caudally based control group flaps and most commonly used flap models were calculated to assess interstudy variability.

Results: A total of 165 different treatment regimens were studied. One-hundred twelve regimens (67.9%) were found to increase flap survival. Most common flap dimensions were 9 cm × 3 cm, followed by 10 cm × 3 cm, 8 cm × 2 cm and 6 cm × 2 cm. Studies using caudally based flaps showed less interstudy variability, but survival rates were similar. Pentoxifylline, sildenafil, chlorpromazine, phenoxybenzamine, and phentolamine were reported to be successful in multiple studies.

Conclusions: There are numerous agents found to be effective for treatment of partial flap necrosis, but further clinical research is needed. To overcome…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in animal, not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free