Suppr超能文献

耳廓撕脱伤与再植技术:一项系统综述。

Auricular avulsion injuries and reattachment techniques: A systematic review.

作者信息

Gailey Andrew D, Farquhar Douglas, Clark Joseph Madison, Shockley William W

机构信息

University of North Carolina School of Medicine Chapel Hill North Carolina USA.

Department of Otolaryngology/Head and Neck Surgery University of North Carolina Health Care Chapel Hill North Carolina USA.

出版信息

Laryngoscope Investig Otolaryngol. 2020 Apr 14;5(3):381-389. doi: 10.1002/lio2.372. eCollection 2020 Jun.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

Multiple surgical techniques exist in the acute management of auricular avulsion injuries, including reattachment of the tissue as a composite graft, reconstruction using local skin flaps, the pocket principle, the Baudet method, and microvascular repair. This review aimed to compare the success rates of reattachment methods in auricular avulsion injuries.

METHODS

A PubMed search systematically identified cases in which (a) an auricular avulsion injury occurred and (b) reattachment was attempted. Search results were combined with an extensive review of references from published studies. In total, 148 cases were identified. Three reviewers independently graded the final aesthetic result of each case using a 5point scale. The average grade of each repair was compared to the reattachment method to identify successful techniques.

RESULTS

Microvascular repair was associated with a statistically significant higher success rate compared to all other reattachment methods. Composite graft reattachment also tended to generate better final aesthetic outcomes, but this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

Microvascular repair of the avulsed segment consistently demonstrated higher success rates. Composite graft reattachment should also be considered under the right circumstances. Overall, microvascular repair and composite graft reattachment should be considered the best options in cases of auricular avulsion repair. The authors share a major concern that other methods that rely on the use of periauricular skin will compromise any future attempts for secondary reconstruction, such as staged procedures using costal cartilage grafts. Manipulation of these tissues and in particular burying of the avulsed ear cartilage is discouraged.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

摘要

目的

耳廓撕脱伤的急性处理存在多种手术技术,包括将组织作为复合移植物重新附着、使用局部皮瓣重建、袋状原则、鲍代特法和微血管修复。本综述旨在比较耳廓撕脱伤中重新附着方法的成功率。

方法

通过PubMed检索系统地识别出(a)发生耳廓撕脱伤且(b)尝试进行重新附着的病例。检索结果与对已发表研究参考文献的广泛回顾相结合。总共识别出148例病例。三位评审员使用5分制独立对每个病例的最终美学结果进行评分。将每种修复方法的平均评分与重新附着方法进行比较,以确定成功的技术。

结果

与所有其他重新附着方法相比,微血管修复的成功率在统计学上显著更高。复合移植物重新附着也往往能产生更好的最终美学效果,但这种差异在统计学上不显著。

结论

撕脱段的微血管修复始终显示出更高的成功率。在合适的情况下也应考虑复合移植物重新附着。总体而言,微血管修复和复合移植物重新附着应被视为耳廓撕脱伤修复的最佳选择。作者们共同关注的一个主要问题是,其他依赖于耳周皮肤使用的方法会影响未来任何二次重建的尝试,例如使用肋软骨移植物的分期手术。不鼓励对这些组织进行操作,尤其是对撕脱的耳软骨进行埋置。

证据水平

4级。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/ed61/7314473/b165636d760a/LIO2-5-381-g001.jpg

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