Suppr超能文献

显微外科静脉吻合技术的比较

A comparison of microsurgical venous anastomosis techniques.

作者信息

Umezawa Hiroki, Ogawa Rei, Nakamizo Munenaga, Yokoshima Kazuhiko, Hyakusoku Hiko

机构信息

Department of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Nippon Medical School.

出版信息

J Nippon Med Sch. 2015;82(1):14-20. doi: 10.1272/jnms.82.14.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Successful vascular anastomosis is essential for the survival of transferred free tissue. Arterial anastomosis is typically uncomplicated because the lumen is easily maintained and the vessel walls have elasticity. Venous anastomosis, however, is more time consuming because the vessel walls are thin and extensible. This article describes, reviews, and compares 3 currently used venous anastomosis techniques.

METHODS

From April 2012 through January 2014, free tissue transfer and supercharging pedicled tissue transfer were performed in 107 and 10 patients, respectively, at our hospital. According to the anastomotic technique used, patients (83 men and 34 women; mean age, 60.6 years) were divided into interrupted suture, continuous suture, and microvascular anastomotic coupling device (MACD) groups. Medical records were reviewed, and postoperative results were analyzed.

RESULTS

The diameter of anastomosed veins did not differ significantly among the groups. However, among the interrupted suture, continuous suture, and MACD groups, there were significant differences in vascular anastomosis time (51, 43.9, and 29.5 minutes, respectively) and transferred tissue ischemic time (151.9, 139.1, and 117.5 minutes, respectively). Surgical site infection occurred in 9 patients, and flap necrosis occurred in 2 patients. However, complication rates did not differ significantly among the 3 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The venous anastomosis technique does not affect the complication rate but does affect anastomosis time and flap ischemia time. On the basis of these results, we believe that the continuous suture and MACD techniques are easier and safer for venous anastomosis than is the traditional interrupted suture technique.

摘要

背景

成功的血管吻合对于游离组织移植的存活至关重要。动脉吻合通常并不复杂,因为管腔易于维持且血管壁具有弹性。然而,静脉吻合则更为耗时,因为血管壁薄且可延展。本文描述、回顾并比较了3种目前常用的静脉吻合技术。

方法

2012年4月至2014年1月,我院分别对107例患者进行了游离组织移植,对10例患者进行了带蒂组织移植增压术。根据所采用的吻合技术,将患者(83例男性和34例女性;平均年龄60.6岁)分为间断缝合组、连续缝合组和微血管吻合耦合装置(MACD)组。回顾病历并分析术后结果。

结果

各组间吻合静脉的直径无显著差异。然而,在间断缝合组、连续缝合组和MACD组中,血管吻合时间(分别为51、43.9和29.5分钟)和移植组织缺血时间(分别为151.9、139.1和117.5分钟)存在显著差异。9例患者发生手术部位感染,2例患者发生皮瓣坏死。然而,3组间的并发症发生率无显著差异。

结论

静脉吻合技术不影响并发症发生率,但会影响吻合时间和皮瓣缺血时间。基于这些结果,我们认为连续缝合和MACD技术在静脉吻合方面比传统的间断缝合技术更简便、更安全。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验