Abraham Manoj, Badhey Arvind, Hu Shirley, Kadakia Sameep, Rasamny J K, Moscatello Augustine, Ducic Yadranko
Department of Otolaryngology, New York Medical College, Valhalla, New York.
Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, New York Eye and Ear Infirmary of Mount Sinai, New York, New York.
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2018 Jun;11(2):85-95. doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1607068. Epub 2017 Oct 31.
Head and neck patients undergoing microvascular reconstruction are at high risk for thromboembolism. While the prevention of thromboembolism has become an essential aspect of care, within the field of microsurgery, concern for anastomotic complications have hindered the creation of an accepted regimen. The aim of this review was to evaluate the risks and benefits of prophylactic agents for thromboprophylaxis. A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and PubMed/NCBI databases. Articles discussing thromboprophylaxis in otolaryngology, head and neck surgery, or microvascular reconstruction were considered in the review from the past 30 years. The majority of patients undergoing microvascular surgery have multiple risk factors for thrombus formation. Several consensus guidelines exist for the prophylaxis in patients who are critically ill, undergoing surgery, or with malignancy. Significant evidence supports the routine use of mechanical means, such as early mobilization and pneumatic compression along with subcutaneous heparin. Low-molecular-weight heparin is also frequently utilized, although results are largely divided. Data on aspirin remain equivocal. Studies on microvascular failure and flap loss have demonstrated little to no association with chemoprophylaxis. The evidence for postoperative thromboprophylaxis regimens in patients undergoing head and neck free tissue transfer is variable. Multiple studies have supported the use of unfractionated heparin or low-molecular-weight heparin. There appears to be an expert consensus for the combined use of mechanical prophylactic methods and chemical prophylaxis. Prospective randomized trials are required to validate the most effective combination of chemoprophylaxis agents.
接受微血管重建的头颈部患者发生血栓栓塞的风险很高。虽然预防血栓栓塞已成为护理的一个重要方面,但在显微外科领域,对吻合口并发症的担忧阻碍了被广泛接受的预防方案的制定。本综述的目的是评估预防性药物预防血栓形成的风险和益处。我们在MEDLINE、Cochrane图书馆和PubMed/NCBI数据库中进行了文献检索。本综述纳入了过去30年中讨论耳鼻喉科、头颈外科或微血管重建中血栓预防的文章。大多数接受微血管手术的患者有多种血栓形成的危险因素。对于重症患者、接受手术的患者或患有恶性肿瘤的患者,存在一些关于预防的共识指南。大量证据支持常规使用机械方法,如早期活动和气动压迫以及皮下注射肝素。低分子量肝素也经常被使用,尽管结果大多存在分歧。关于阿司匹林的数据仍然不明确。关于微血管功能衰竭和皮瓣丢失的研究表明,与化学预防几乎没有关联。对头颈部游离组织移植患者术后血栓预防方案的证据各不相同。多项研究支持使用普通肝素或低分子量肝素。对于联合使用机械预防方法和化学预防似乎存在专家共识。需要进行前瞻性随机试验来验证化学预防药物的最有效组合。