Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Skin flap surgery for wound repair in cats - results and risks
By Boonwittaya, Nithida & Thengchaisri, Naris·Published in Journal of feline medicine and surgery·2026·Kasetsart University Veterinary Teaching Hospital·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: EXPRESS: Retrospective Study of Axial Pattern and Subdermal Plexus Skin Flaps in Cats: Clinical Indications, Surgical Sites, Complications, and Outcomes.
- Species:
- cat
Plain-English summary
A group of 52 cats underwent surgery to repair chronic wounds using two types of skin flaps: axial pattern flaps (APFs) and subdermal plexus flaps (SPFs). Most of the surgeries were successful, but some cats experienced complications like skin necrosis, which occurred in about 45% of cases. Interestingly, SPFs used on the back of the cats had a higher chance of coming apart after surgery. Overall, both flap types had similar complication rates, but the location of the flap mattered when it came to healing. Most cats recovered well after their procedures.
People also search for: cat skin flap surgery recovery · cat wound healing complications · why is my cat's wound not healing
Abstract
ObjectivesThe aim of the present study was to report the outcome and postoperative complications of wound reconstruction in cats using axial pattern flaps (APFs) and subdermal plexus flaps (SPFs), and to assess associations between location, indication, flap type, postoperative complications, and outcomes.MethodsThe surgical records of 52 cats undergoing 62 subdermal plexus flap (SPF) or axial pattern flap (APF) reconstructions were retrospectively reviewed from 2014 to 2025.Data collected included signalment, indication, location, flap type, postoperative complications, and outcomes. Descriptive analyses and associations between variables were assessed.ResultsChronic wounds were the most common indication (53/62; 85.5%), followed by mass removal and acute wounds. Among APFs, the lateral caudal flap was the most employed (7/30; 23.3%), while the skin fold flap was the most frequent SPFs (19/32; 62.5%). A significant association was observed between anatomical location and clinical indication (P = 0.028). Overall complication rates did not differ significantly between APFs and SPFs. The most frequently observed complications were necrosis (45.2%) in all flaps. No significant associations were identified between clinical indication and wound dehiscence. Flap dehiscence was significantly more prevalent in SPFs applied to the dorsal body (7/8; 87.5%; P = 0.032).Conclusions and relevanceAPFs and SPFs demonstrated comparable overall complication rates in feline wound reconstruction. While most complications were similar between flap types, anatomical location may be associated with wound dehiscence in SPFs, emphasizing the importance of careful flap selection.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/42068002/