Microvascular Free Flaps

1995 ◽  
Vol 112 (5) ◽  
pp. P47-P47
Author(s):  
Bruce H. Haughey ◽  
J. Leslie Walker ◽  
James C. Beggs

Educational objectives: To understand the indications for and against microvascular reconstruction and to grasp the technical and clinical indications of a successful outcome and the methodology of obtaining reimbursement.

2008 ◽  
Vol 139 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. P133-P133
Author(s):  
Rene M Pena ◽  
Paul Dae-Gwon Kim ◽  
Mark R Rowe

Objectives The practice of head and neck reconstruction has been evolving over the past 15 years with the introduction of new surgical techniques, and increasing options for tissue harvest. We sought to investigate corresponding trends in the disciplines performing head and neck microvascular reconstruction. Methods 2 specialties for the proportion of head and neck microvascular reconstruction were compared: those performed by otolaryngologists and those done by plastics surgery. A 3-part study was performed to evaluate these trends: 1) Total case number of microvascular cases of otolaryngology residents and plastic surgery residents over the last 4 years was evaluated through the ACGME national data; 2) A poll of the percentage of otolaryngology residency programs that have their own microvascular reconstructive surgeon, and if that surgeon was hired within the last 5 years; and 3) The number of scientific articles published relating to microvascular head and neck reconstruction were systematically queried for 2 timeframes, (1995–2000) and (2002–2007). Results The national number of cases has steadily increased in the last 5 years. It has slowly increased compared to plastic surgery, but when all flaps are evaluated, it is not significant. We also found that the number of peer-reviewed articles relating to microvascular free flaps authored by otolaryngologists has increased. The data from the polls are still pending. Conclusions There is an increasing trend emerging in the practice of head and neck microvascular reconstruction, with an increase number of articles being authored and increased number of surgeries being performed by otolaryngolo-gists, compared to plastic surgeons.


2004 ◽  
Vol 52 (6) ◽  
pp. 581-584 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joseph Michaels V ◽  
Michael Dobryansky ◽  
Robert D. Galiano ◽  
Daniel J. Ceradini ◽  
Robert Bonillas ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (07) ◽  
pp. 522-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonas Kolbenschlag ◽  
Alexandra Ruikis ◽  
Lisa Faulhaber ◽  
Adrien Daigeler ◽  
Manuel Held ◽  
...  

Background Free tissue transfer has become a common and safe reconstructive procedure. However, total or partial flap losses remain a looming threat, especially for lower extremity free flaps due to the gravitational challenge associated with dependency. Thus, the majority of microsurgical centers apply some kind of structured flap training. However, due to the lack of evidence, these differ greatly, for example, in the application of an elastic wrapping during dangling. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess the impact of an elastic wrapping on free flap microcirculation, edema, and pain during dangling. Methods Standardized dangling was performed from postoperative day (POD) 6 to 9 in 30 patients with microvascular reconstruction of the lower extremity. The first dangling per day was performed without elastic wrapping, followed by another session with 30 mm Hg of elastic wrapping. Tissue oxygen saturation (StO2), regional hemoglobin content (rHb), and blood flow (BF) were continuously measured in the free flap; the circumference of the flap as well as pain was assessed. Results During wrapped dangling, BF as well as StO2 was significantly increased, while rHb was significantly lower on all PODs. Wrapped dangling was rated significantly more comfortable and the girth of the free flaps was significantly less after wrapped dependency when compared with unwrapped dangling. Conclusion Dangling with an elastic wrapping with 30 mm Hg pressure improved flap microcirculation and reduced pain and edema formation.


2006 ◽  
Vol 59 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-165 ◽  
Author(s):  
Aleksi R. Schrey ◽  
Kalle M.J. Aitasalo ◽  
Ilpo A.J. Kinnunen ◽  
Marko S. Laaksonen ◽  
Riitta K. Parkkola ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document