Ahmadi Iraj, Herle Pradyumna, Miller George, Hunter-Smith David J, Leong James, Rozen Warren Matthew
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Victoria, Australia.
Department of Surgery, School of Clinical Science at Monash Health, Monash University, Victoria, Australia.
J Reconstr Microsurg. 2017 Jul;33(6):402-411. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1599099. Epub 2017 Mar 4.
Optimal outcomes in microsurgery have been attributed to a range of factors, with performing of end-to-end (ETE) versus end-to-side (ETS) influencing anastomotic complications and flap outcomes. A systematic review of the literature and meta-analysis was undertaken to evaluate the relative risks of anastomotic complications with ETE versus ETS approaches, for arterial and venous anastomoses looking at risk ratios (RRs) for thrombosis and overall flap failure. RRs of thrombosis and flap failure in ETS versus ETE venous anastomosis groups were 1.30 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-3.21) and 1.50 (95% CI: 0.85-2.67), respectively. The RRs of thrombosis and flap failure in ETS versus ETE arterial anastomosis groups were 1.04 (95% CI: 0.32-3.35) and 1.04 (95% CI: 0.72-1.48), respectively. Differences in rates of thrombosis and flap failure between ETE and ETS venous and arterial anastomoses are marginal and nonsignificant. As such, the type of anastomotic technique is best decided on a case-by-case basis, dependent on anatomical, surgical, and patient factors.
显微外科手术的最佳效果归因于一系列因素,其中端端吻合(ETE)与端侧吻合(ETS)的操作会影响吻合口并发症和皮瓣结果。我们进行了一项系统的文献综述和荟萃分析,以评估ETE与ETS方法在动脉和静脉吻合中发生吻合口并发症的相对风险,观察血栓形成和皮瓣总体失败的风险比(RRs)。ETS与ETE静脉吻合组中血栓形成和皮瓣失败的RRs分别为1.30(95%置信区间[CI]:0.53 - 3.21)和1.50(95%CI:0.85 - 2.67)。ETS与ETE动脉吻合组中血栓形成和皮瓣失败的RRs分别为1.04(95%CI:0.32 - 3.35)和1.04(95%CI:0.72 - 1.48)。ETE和ETS静脉及动脉吻合在血栓形成率和皮瓣失败率上的差异很小且无统计学意义。因此,吻合技术的类型最好根据具体情况,取决于解剖、手术和患者因素来决定。