Suppr超能文献

单纯再植术在带蒂耳廓撕脱伤中是可行的选择吗?文献系统综述

Is Simple Reimplantation a Viable Option in Pediculated Auricular Avulsions? A Systematic Review of the Literature.

作者信息

Román Padilla Jose Carlos, Ortiz Peces Luis, Alavedra Martínez Pol, Cebrián Carretero Jose Luis

机构信息

Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, La Paz University Hospital, 28046 Madrid, Spain;

出版信息

Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr. 2025 Aug 27;18(3):36. doi: 10.3390/cmtr18030036. eCollection 2025 Sep.

Abstract

Auricular avulsion injuries are rare, and microvascular reimplantation is considered the preferred treatment according to current literature. However, when a small skin pedicle is preserved, non-microvascular reattachment techniques may offer comparable outcomes. This systematic review aims to assess whether these techniques could represent a viable alternative. We analyzed 32 cases of pedicled auricular avulsion reported in 16 articles, focusing on patient demographics, injury mechanisms, pedicle characteristics, venous congestion, and postoperative management. Venous congestion occurred in 11 patients, with a significantly higher risk in narrower pedicles (mean width 9.82 mm; 95% CI: 4.75-14.89; = 0.025). Prophylactic heparin significantly reduced this risk ( = 0.007). Other interventions-leech therapy and hyperbaric oxygen-lacked sufficient data for firm conclusions. Most cases achieved graft survival; necrosis occurred in some, and only two patients required additional surgery. Non-microvascular techniques appear to be a viable alternative to microvascular reimplantation, with similar results and potentially fewer complications. Venous congestion remains the main challenge, requiring active management and hospitalization for monitoring. Limited case series and publication bias still hinder the development of standardized guidelines.

摘要

耳廓撕脱伤较为罕见,根据现有文献,微血管再植术被认为是首选治疗方法。然而,当保留一小片皮肤蒂时,非微血管再附着技术可能会带来相当的治疗效果。本系统评价旨在评估这些技术是否可作为一种可行的替代方法。我们分析了16篇文章中报道的32例带蒂耳廓撕脱伤病例,重点关注患者人口统计学特征、损伤机制、蒂的特征、静脉淤血及术后管理。11例患者出现静脉淤血,蒂较窄者(平均宽度9.82 mm;95%可信区间:4.75 - 14.89;P = 0.025)发生风险显著更高。预防性使用肝素可显著降低此风险(P = 0.007)。其他干预措施——水蛭疗法和高压氧疗法——缺乏足够数据得出确切结论。大多数病例实现了移植物存活;部分病例出现坏死,仅2例患者需要再次手术。非微血管技术似乎是微血管再植术的一种可行替代方法,效果相似且潜在并发症可能更少。静脉淤血仍是主要挑战,需要积极处理并住院监测。有限的病例系列和发表偏倚仍然阻碍着标准化指南的制定。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a113/12452382/ea208b314d1d/cmtr-18-00036-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