激光散斑血流成像支持术中吲哚菁绿评价腹壁下穿支皮瓣血流。

IF 1.5 Q3 SURGERY
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open Pub Date : 2025-03-20 eCollection Date: 2025-03-01 DOI:10.1097/GOX.0000000000006627
Kazuhiro Tsunekawa, Daisuke Yanagisawa, Shunsuke Yuzuriha
{"title":"激光散斑血流成像支持术中吲哚菁绿评价腹壁下穿支皮瓣血流。","authors":"Kazuhiro Tsunekawa, Daisuke Yanagisawa, Shunsuke Yuzuriha","doi":"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006627","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurately evaluating cutaneous blood flow during the elevation of a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may reduce postoperative complications in breast reconstruction surgery. This study examined whether laser speckle flowgraphy (LSFG) could be used to help objectively identify the safe areas of DIEP flaps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-eight patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap at Shinshu University Hospital between 2020 and 2024 were prospectively studied. During flap elevation, skin blood flow throughout the flap was measured using LSFG and compared with results obtained by indocyanine green (ICG) angiography. The cohort was also divided according to the number and location of perforators, and an intergroup comparison was performed according to LSFG readings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all subjects, relative LSFG blood flow in zones 2 (89.1%) and 3 (87.9%) was comparable, whereas blood flow in zone 4 (72.8%) was significantly lower than in those areas (both <i>P</i> < 0.001). In the lateral row group, blood flow in zone 2 tended to be lower and in zone 3 tended to be higher than in the medial row group (zone 2: 82.6% versus 89.5%, zone 3: 93.6% versus 86.8%). LSFG values did not differ significantly in relation to perforator number. LSFG-determined blood flow in the stained side of the ICG-determined staining border was significantly higher than in the nonstained side (80.6% versus 71.4%, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LSFG enables objective, noninvasive evaluation of safety margins in DIEP flaps that may support ICG angiography. Safe zones may vary depending on the location of the selected perforator.</p>","PeriodicalId":20149,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","volume":"13 3","pages":"e6627"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11925408/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Laser Speckle Flowgraphy Can Support Intraoperative Assessment of Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Blood Flow With Indocyanine Green.\",\"authors\":\"Kazuhiro Tsunekawa, Daisuke Yanagisawa, Shunsuke Yuzuriha\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/GOX.0000000000006627\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Accurately evaluating cutaneous blood flow during the elevation of a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may reduce postoperative complications in breast reconstruction surgery. This study examined whether laser speckle flowgraphy (LSFG) could be used to help objectively identify the safe areas of DIEP flaps.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Forty-eight patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap at Shinshu University Hospital between 2020 and 2024 were prospectively studied. During flap elevation, skin blood flow throughout the flap was measured using LSFG and compared with results obtained by indocyanine green (ICG) angiography. The cohort was also divided according to the number and location of perforators, and an intergroup comparison was performed according to LSFG readings.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In all subjects, relative LSFG blood flow in zones 2 (89.1%) and 3 (87.9%) was comparable, whereas blood flow in zone 4 (72.8%) was significantly lower than in those areas (both <i>P</i> < 0.001). In the lateral row group, blood flow in zone 2 tended to be lower and in zone 3 tended to be higher than in the medial row group (zone 2: 82.6% versus 89.5%, zone 3: 93.6% versus 86.8%). LSFG values did not differ significantly in relation to perforator number. LSFG-determined blood flow in the stained side of the ICG-determined staining border was significantly higher than in the nonstained side (80.6% versus 71.4%, <i>P</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>LSFG enables objective, noninvasive evaluation of safety margins in DIEP flaps that may support ICG angiography. Safe zones may vary depending on the location of the selected perforator.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20149,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open\",\"volume\":\"13 3\",\"pages\":\"e6627\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11925408/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006627\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/3/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000006627","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:准确评估上腹部深下穿支皮瓣提升过程中的皮肤血流量可以减少乳房重建手术的术后并发症。本研究探讨了激光散斑流成像(LSFG)是否可以帮助客观地确定DIEP皮瓣的安全区域。方法:对2020 ~ 2024年在信州大学医院行DIEP皮瓣单侧乳房再造术的48例患者进行前瞻性研究。皮瓣抬高期间,用LSFG测量皮瓣的皮肤血流量,并与吲哚菁绿(ICG)血管造影结果进行比较。根据穿孔器的数量和位置对队列进行分组,并根据LSFG读数进行组间比较。结果:在所有受试者中,2区(89.1%)和3区(87.9%)的相对LSFG血流具有可比性,而4区(72.8%)的血流明显低于这些区域(P均< 0.001)。侧行组2区血流量较中行组低,3区血流量较中行组高(2区:82.6%对89.5%,3区:93.6%对86.8%)。LSFG值与穿支数目无显著差异。lsg测定的染色侧icg测定的染色侧血流量显著高于未染色侧(80.6%比71.4%,P < 0.001)。结论:LSFG能够客观、无创地评估DIEP皮瓣的安全边界,这可能支持ICG血管造影。安全区域可能会根据所选穿孔器的位置而变化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Laser Speckle Flowgraphy Can Support Intraoperative Assessment of Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Blood Flow With Indocyanine Green.

Background: Accurately evaluating cutaneous blood flow during the elevation of a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap may reduce postoperative complications in breast reconstruction surgery. This study examined whether laser speckle flowgraphy (LSFG) could be used to help objectively identify the safe areas of DIEP flaps.

Methods: Forty-eight patients who underwent unilateral breast reconstruction with a DIEP flap at Shinshu University Hospital between 2020 and 2024 were prospectively studied. During flap elevation, skin blood flow throughout the flap was measured using LSFG and compared with results obtained by indocyanine green (ICG) angiography. The cohort was also divided according to the number and location of perforators, and an intergroup comparison was performed according to LSFG readings.

Results: In all subjects, relative LSFG blood flow in zones 2 (89.1%) and 3 (87.9%) was comparable, whereas blood flow in zone 4 (72.8%) was significantly lower than in those areas (both P < 0.001). In the lateral row group, blood flow in zone 2 tended to be lower and in zone 3 tended to be higher than in the medial row group (zone 2: 82.6% versus 89.5%, zone 3: 93.6% versus 86.8%). LSFG values did not differ significantly in relation to perforator number. LSFG-determined blood flow in the stained side of the ICG-determined staining border was significantly higher than in the nonstained side (80.6% versus 71.4%, P < 0.001).

Conclusions: LSFG enables objective, noninvasive evaluation of safety margins in DIEP flaps that may support ICG angiography. Safe zones may vary depending on the location of the selected perforator.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
13.30%
发文量
1584
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open is an open access, peer reviewed, international journal focusing on global plastic and reconstructive surgery.Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open publishes on all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including basic science/experimental studies pertinent to the field and also clinical articles on such topics as: breast reconstruction, head and neck surgery, pediatric and craniofacial surgery, hand and microsurgery, wound healing, and cosmetic and aesthetic surgery. Clinical studies, experimental articles, ideas and innovations, and techniques and case reports are all welcome article types. Manuscript submission is open to all surgeons, researchers, and other health care providers world-wide who wish to communicate their research results on topics related to plastic and reconstructive surgery. Furthermore, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open, a complimentary journal to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, provides an open access venue for the publication of those research studies sponsored by private and public funding agencies that require open access publication of study results. Its mission is to disseminate high quality, peer reviewed research in plastic and reconstructive surgery to the widest possible global audience, through an open access platform. As an open access journal, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open offers its content for free to any viewer. Authors of articles retain their copyright to the materials published. Additionally, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery—Global Open provides rapid review and publication of accepted papers.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信