Corrigendum to "The extended SCIP flap: An anatomical and clinical study of a new SCIP flap design" [J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 75(9) (2022) 3217-3225].

The authors regret that the printed version of the above article contained several errors. PFA should be CFA (common femoral artery) in the following sentences: Methods: “Once the SCIA was identified, the dissection was taken deep to its origin from the PFA to obtain a longer pedicle with a greater calibre (1.2–1.5 mm)”. Discussion: “Its pedicle length and its diameter are large because the SCIA is harvested to its origin in the PFA.”. Conclusions: “3. The advantages of this flap are an easier dissection of longer pedicles, greater size of skin paddle with direct donor site closure, and a large calibre of the vessels as they are followed to their origin off the PFA.”. In the abstract, “We describe a variation of the superficial circumflex inguinal artery perforator (SCIP) flap, based the superficial branch of the superficial circumflex inguinal artery (SCIA)” should say “We describe a variation of the superficial circumflex iliac artery perforator (SCIP) flap, based the superficial branch of the superficial circumflex iliac artery (SCIA)”. In discussion, “The first inguinal perforator flap was described by Koshima in 2004, based on the muscular perforators of the deep branch of the SCIA and harvested in a suprafascial plane” should say “The first superficial iliac artery perforator flap was described by Koshima in 2004, based on the muscular perforators of the deep branch of the SCIA and harvested in a suprafascial plane”. The authors would like to apologise for any inconvenience caused. The extended SCIP flap: An anatomical and clinical study of a new SCIP flap designJournal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic SurgeryVol. 75Issue 9PreviewWe describe a variation of the superficial circumflex inguinal artery perforator (SCIP) flap, based the superficial branch of the superficial circumflex inguinal artery (SCIA) Full-Text PDF