"Matched Comparison of Microsurgical Anastomoses Performed with Loupes Magnification Versus Operating Microscope in Traumatic Lower Extremity Reconstruction".
John T. Stranix, S. Azoury, Z-Hye Lee, Geoffrey M. Kozak, N. Plana, V. Thanik, P. Saadeh, J. Levine, L. Levin, S. Kovach
{"title":"\"Matched Comparison of Microsurgical Anastomoses Performed with Loupes Magnification Versus Operating Microscope in Traumatic Lower Extremity Reconstruction\".","authors":"John T. Stranix, S. Azoury, Z-Hye Lee, Geoffrey M. Kozak, N. Plana, V. Thanik, P. Saadeh, J. Levine, L. Levin, S. Kovach","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000006381","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nWhile the surgical microscope remains the most common method for visual magnification for microsurgical anastomoses in free tissue transfer, loupes-only magnification for free flap breast reconstruction has been demonstrated to be safe and effective. In order to evaluate the loupes-only technique in lower extremity free flap reconstruction, we compared perioperative outcomes between microsurgical anastomoses performed with loupes magnification versus a surgical microscope.\n\n\nMETHODS\nTwo-institution retrospective study of soft tissue free flaps for traumatic below-knee reconstruction. Optimal subgroup matching was performed using patient age, defect location, flap type (muscle vs. fasciocutaneous), and time from injury (acute <30 days vs. remote >30 days) for conditional logistic regression analysis of perioperative outcomes.\n\n\nRESULTS\n373 flaps met inclusion criteria for direct matched comparison of anastomoses performed with loupes magnification (n=150) versus a surgical microscope (n=223). Overall major complication rates were 15.3%: takeback for vascular compromise 7.8%, partial flap failure 7.8%, and total flap loss 5.4%. No differences were observed between the loupes and microscope groups in regards to major complications (14.0% vs. 16.1%;OR=0.78(0.38-1.59)), takeback for vascular compromise (5.3% vs. 9.4%;OR=0.51(0.19-1.39)), any flap failure (13.3% vs. 13.0%;OR=1.21(0.56-2.64)), partial flap failure (7.3% vs. 8.1%;OR=1.04(0.43-2.54)), and total flap loss (6.0% vs. 4.9%;OR=1.63(0.42-6.35)).\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nPerioperative complication rates, takebacks for vascular compromise, partial flap losses, and total flap failure rates were not significantly different between the matched loupes and microscope groups. Overall microsurgical success rates in traumatic lower extremity free flap reconstruction appear to be independent of the microsurgical technique used for visual magnification.","PeriodicalId":20168,"journal":{"name":"Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery","volume":"21 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000006381","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9
Abstract
BACKGROUND
While the surgical microscope remains the most common method for visual magnification for microsurgical anastomoses in free tissue transfer, loupes-only magnification for free flap breast reconstruction has been demonstrated to be safe and effective. In order to evaluate the loupes-only technique in lower extremity free flap reconstruction, we compared perioperative outcomes between microsurgical anastomoses performed with loupes magnification versus a surgical microscope.
METHODS
Two-institution retrospective study of soft tissue free flaps for traumatic below-knee reconstruction. Optimal subgroup matching was performed using patient age, defect location, flap type (muscle vs. fasciocutaneous), and time from injury (acute <30 days vs. remote >30 days) for conditional logistic regression analysis of perioperative outcomes.
RESULTS
373 flaps met inclusion criteria for direct matched comparison of anastomoses performed with loupes magnification (n=150) versus a surgical microscope (n=223). Overall major complication rates were 15.3%: takeback for vascular compromise 7.8%, partial flap failure 7.8%, and total flap loss 5.4%. No differences were observed between the loupes and microscope groups in regards to major complications (14.0% vs. 16.1%;OR=0.78(0.38-1.59)), takeback for vascular compromise (5.3% vs. 9.4%;OR=0.51(0.19-1.39)), any flap failure (13.3% vs. 13.0%;OR=1.21(0.56-2.64)), partial flap failure (7.3% vs. 8.1%;OR=1.04(0.43-2.54)), and total flap loss (6.0% vs. 4.9%;OR=1.63(0.42-6.35)).
CONCLUSIONS
Perioperative complication rates, takebacks for vascular compromise, partial flap losses, and total flap failure rates were not significantly different between the matched loupes and microscope groups. Overall microsurgical success rates in traumatic lower extremity free flap reconstruction appear to be independent of the microsurgical technique used for visual magnification.
虽然手术显微镜仍然是游离组织移植中显微外科吻合最常用的视觉放大方法,但仅使用显微镜进行游离皮瓣乳房重建已被证明是安全有效的。为了评估仅使用显微镜的技术在下肢自由皮瓣重建中的应用,我们比较了在显微镜下和在显微镜下进行显微外科吻合的围手术期结果。方法回顾性研究游离软组织皮瓣在创伤性膝下重建中的应用。根据患者年龄、缺损位置、皮瓣类型(肌肉或筋膜皮肤)和损伤时间(急性30天)进行最佳亚组匹配,对围手术期结果进行条件logistic回归分析。结果373个皮瓣符合纳入标准,进行了镜下(n=150)与手术显微镜(n=223)吻合的直接匹配比较。主要并发症的总发生率为15.3%:血管受损的恢复为7.8%,部分皮瓣失败为7.8%,皮瓣全部丢失为5.4%。在主要并发症(14.0% vs. 16.1%;OR=0.78(0.38-1.59))、血管受损的恢复(5.3% vs. 9.4%;OR=0.51(0.19-1.39))、任何皮瓣失败(13.3% vs. 13.0%;OR=1.21(0.56-2.64))、部分皮瓣失败(7.3% vs. 8.1%;OR=1.04(0.43-2.54))和皮瓣全部丢失(6.0% vs. 4.9%;OR=1.63(0.42-6.35))方面,镜下组和显微镜组之间没有差异。结论配镜组与显微镜组手术并发症发生率、血管损伤回收率、部分皮瓣丢失率、皮瓣总失败率无显著性差异。显微外科手术在外伤性下肢游离皮瓣重建中的总体成功率似乎与显微外科技术用于视觉放大无关。