外伤性下肢急诊及延迟显微外科抢救

E. Gur, Y. Tiftikcioglu, Turgut Furkan Kuybulu, Kutay Durukan, M. Yeğin, N. Ozkayin
{"title":"外伤性下肢急诊及延迟显微外科抢救","authors":"E. Gur, Y. Tiftikcioglu, Turgut Furkan Kuybulu, Kutay Durukan, M. Yeğin, N. Ozkayin","doi":"10.28982/josam.7613","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background/Aim: The power of free flaps for lower extremity injury reconstruction is no longer a matter of debate; however, contrasting views remain regarding the timing of reconstruction. The mainstay article of Godina reported that reconstruction within the first three days after injury was more advantageous than surgery at later times, but different views about the best day for reconstruction have also been described in the literature. With developments in the field of microsurgery, plastic surgeons have become more experienced, shortened the times needed for surgery, and achieved flap success. We have also become more experienced with surgical times, and reconstruction on the day of injury has been performed as an emergency reconstruction (ER) procedure since 2018. However, despite the disadvantages of a delayed wait period, patients still experience delayed reconstruction (DR) due to their pre-operative conditions and dispatches from peripheral centers over delayed time periods. This study aimed to present our experiences with lower extremity reconstruction in emergency situations and after delayed periods with descriptions of technical tips for each situation.\nMethods: Between 2018 and 2021, patients who underwent lower extremity reconstructions were examined as retrospective case-control study. Twenty-four patients (17 male and seven female) underwent lower extremity reconstructions with microsurgical free flap coverage. Patients’ ages ranged from 6 to 75 years old. Ten patients underwent ERs (on the day of injury), and 14 patients underwent DRs. Twenty anterolateral thigh, two medial sural artery perforator, one latissimus dorsi, and one radial forearm flaps were chosen for reconstructions. Flaps were chosen for one-third of the distal lower extremity reconstructions (n=11) and Gustilo type 3B injuries (n=11), Gustilo type 3C injuries (n=1), and one-third for middle lower extremity soft tissue reconstructions (n=1). Infections, length of hospital stays, time spent during the reconstructive surgery, vascular complications, and additional debridement necessity counts were recorded and compared with previous statistical analyses.\nResults: One venous thrombosis in the emergency group and three venous and one arterial thrombosis in the delayed group were reported. The patients were taken to the operating room immediately after which re-anastomoses were performed successfully, and all flaps survived. The hospital stay was between 4 and 60 days in the emergency group and 20 and 99 days in delayed group. Infections (P=0.03), vascular complications (P=0.04), and hospital stays (P=0.01) were statistically significantly lower in the emergency group than in the delayed group.\nConclusion: ER has many advantages, such as preventing time consuming surgeries and providing short hospital stays and low complication rates, over DR. However, DR is inevitable for some reasons, and despite its more complicated nature, meticulous flap follow-up and salvage procedures may provide the same flap success as found with ERs.","PeriodicalId":30878,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Surgery and Medicine","volume":"38 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Emergency and delayed microsurgical salvage of traumatic lower extremities\",\"authors\":\"E. Gur, Y. Tiftikcioglu, Turgut Furkan Kuybulu, Kutay Durukan, M. Yeğin, N. Ozkayin\",\"doi\":\"10.28982/josam.7613\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Background/Aim: The power of free flaps for lower extremity injury reconstruction is no longer a matter of debate; however, contrasting views remain regarding the timing of reconstruction. The mainstay article of Godina reported that reconstruction within the first three days after injury was more advantageous than surgery at later times, but different views about the best day for reconstruction have also been described in the literature. With developments in the field of microsurgery, plastic surgeons have become more experienced, shortened the times needed for surgery, and achieved flap success. We have also become more experienced with surgical times, and reconstruction on the day of injury has been performed as an emergency reconstruction (ER) procedure since 2018. However, despite the disadvantages of a delayed wait period, patients still experience delayed reconstruction (DR) due to their pre-operative conditions and dispatches from peripheral centers over delayed time periods. This study aimed to present our experiences with lower extremity reconstruction in emergency situations and after delayed periods with descriptions of technical tips for each situation.\\nMethods: Between 2018 and 2021, patients who underwent lower extremity reconstructions were examined as retrospective case-control study. Twenty-four patients (17 male and seven female) underwent lower extremity reconstructions with microsurgical free flap coverage. Patients’ ages ranged from 6 to 75 years old. Ten patients underwent ERs (on the day of injury), and 14 patients underwent DRs. Twenty anterolateral thigh, two medial sural artery perforator, one latissimus dorsi, and one radial forearm flaps were chosen for reconstructions. Flaps were chosen for one-third of the distal lower extremity reconstructions (n=11) and Gustilo type 3B injuries (n=11), Gustilo type 3C injuries (n=1), and one-third for middle lower extremity soft tissue reconstructions (n=1). Infections, length of hospital stays, time spent during the reconstructive surgery, vascular complications, and additional debridement necessity counts were recorded and compared with previous statistical analyses.\\nResults: One venous thrombosis in the emergency group and three venous and one arterial thrombosis in the delayed group were reported. The patients were taken to the operating room immediately after which re-anastomoses were performed successfully, and all flaps survived. The hospital stay was between 4 and 60 days in the emergency group and 20 and 99 days in delayed group. Infections (P=0.03), vascular complications (P=0.04), and hospital stays (P=0.01) were statistically significantly lower in the emergency group than in the delayed group.\\nConclusion: ER has many advantages, such as preventing time consuming surgeries and providing short hospital stays and low complication rates, over DR. However, DR is inevitable for some reasons, and despite its more complicated nature, meticulous flap follow-up and salvage procedures may provide the same flap success as found with ERs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":30878,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Surgery and Medicine\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-04-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Surgery and Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.28982/josam.7613\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Surgery and Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.28982/josam.7613","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景/目的:游离皮瓣在下肢损伤重建中的作用已不再是一个争论的问题;然而,关于重建的时间仍然存在不同的观点。Godina的主要文章报道了受伤后三天内重建比之后的手术更有利,但关于重建的最佳时间,文献中也有不同的观点。随着显微外科领域的发展,整形外科医生的经验越来越丰富,缩短了手术时间,并取得了皮瓣的成功。我们对手术时间也有了更多的经验,自2018年以来,在受伤当天进行重建已经成为一项紧急重建(ER)手术。然而,尽管延迟等待期的缺点,患者仍然经历延迟重建(DR)由于他们的术前条件和调度从外周中心延迟的时间。本研究旨在介绍我们在紧急情况下和延迟时间后下肢重建的经验,并描述每种情况的技术技巧。方法:采用回顾性病例对照研究的方法,对2018年至2021年接受下肢重建术的患者进行研究。24例患者(男17例,女7例)采用显微外科游离皮瓣覆盖进行下肢重建。患者年龄从6岁到75岁不等。10例(伤当日)行急诊,14例行dr。选取20个股骨前外侧皮瓣、2个腓肠内侧动脉穿支皮瓣、1个背阔肌皮瓣和1个前臂桡侧皮瓣进行重建。皮瓣用于三分之一的下肢远端重建(n=11), gutilo 3B型损伤(n=11), gutilo 3C型损伤(n=1),三分之一的中下肢软组织重建(n=1)。记录感染、住院时间、重建手术时间、血管并发症和额外的清创必要性计数,并与先前的统计分析进行比较。结果:急诊组静脉血栓1例,延迟组静脉血栓3例,动脉血栓1例。术后立即送往手术室,皮瓣再吻合成功,皮瓣全部成活。急诊组住院时间4 ~ 60天,延迟组住院时间20 ~ 99天。急诊组感染(P=0.03)、血管并发症(P=0.04)、住院时间(P=0.01)明显低于延迟组。结论:内窥镜手术与内窥镜手术相比,具有节省手术时间、住院时间短、并发症发生率低等优点。然而,由于某些原因,内窥镜手术不可避免,尽管内窥镜手术更为复杂,但细致的皮瓣随访和抢救措施可以提供与内窥镜手术相同的皮瓣成功。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Emergency and delayed microsurgical salvage of traumatic lower extremities
Background/Aim: The power of free flaps for lower extremity injury reconstruction is no longer a matter of debate; however, contrasting views remain regarding the timing of reconstruction. The mainstay article of Godina reported that reconstruction within the first three days after injury was more advantageous than surgery at later times, but different views about the best day for reconstruction have also been described in the literature. With developments in the field of microsurgery, plastic surgeons have become more experienced, shortened the times needed for surgery, and achieved flap success. We have also become more experienced with surgical times, and reconstruction on the day of injury has been performed as an emergency reconstruction (ER) procedure since 2018. However, despite the disadvantages of a delayed wait period, patients still experience delayed reconstruction (DR) due to their pre-operative conditions and dispatches from peripheral centers over delayed time periods. This study aimed to present our experiences with lower extremity reconstruction in emergency situations and after delayed periods with descriptions of technical tips for each situation. Methods: Between 2018 and 2021, patients who underwent lower extremity reconstructions were examined as retrospective case-control study. Twenty-four patients (17 male and seven female) underwent lower extremity reconstructions with microsurgical free flap coverage. Patients’ ages ranged from 6 to 75 years old. Ten patients underwent ERs (on the day of injury), and 14 patients underwent DRs. Twenty anterolateral thigh, two medial sural artery perforator, one latissimus dorsi, and one radial forearm flaps were chosen for reconstructions. Flaps were chosen for one-third of the distal lower extremity reconstructions (n=11) and Gustilo type 3B injuries (n=11), Gustilo type 3C injuries (n=1), and one-third for middle lower extremity soft tissue reconstructions (n=1). Infections, length of hospital stays, time spent during the reconstructive surgery, vascular complications, and additional debridement necessity counts were recorded and compared with previous statistical analyses. Results: One venous thrombosis in the emergency group and three venous and one arterial thrombosis in the delayed group were reported. The patients were taken to the operating room immediately after which re-anastomoses were performed successfully, and all flaps survived. The hospital stay was between 4 and 60 days in the emergency group and 20 and 99 days in delayed group. Infections (P=0.03), vascular complications (P=0.04), and hospital stays (P=0.01) were statistically significantly lower in the emergency group than in the delayed group. Conclusion: ER has many advantages, such as preventing time consuming surgeries and providing short hospital stays and low complication rates, over DR. However, DR is inevitable for some reasons, and despite its more complicated nature, meticulous flap follow-up and salvage procedures may provide the same flap success as found with ERs.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
审稿时长
6 weeks
×
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