Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2016
Clinical audit and national survey on the assessment of collateral circulation before radial forearm free flap harvest.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Abdullakutty Anwer, Bajwa Mandeep S, Patel Sonum, D'Souza Jacob
Аннотация
Controversy exists regarding the use of Duplex Ultrasound (DUS) in addition to the Modified Allen's Test (MAT) for the assessment of collateral circulation prior to elevation of the Radial Forearm Free Flap (RFFF). A survey amongst members of BAOMS Head & Neck Oncology Subspecialty Interest Group and a completed local audit was undertaken to assess the need for DUS. Data for the initial audit was collected retrospectively between 2010 and 2013. Both MAT and DUS was performed routinely during this period. The results of the survey and initial audit led to a change in practice and DUS was no longer requested. The re-audit was performed prospectively between 2013 and 2015. The results of the survey showed that all respondents performed MAT. DUS was performed 'always' by 40%, 'sometimes' by 13.3% and 'never' by 46.7%. A total of 41 patients were included in the initial audit, 6 had an abnormal DUS but only 1 had an abnormal MAT. Five cases had an abnormal DUS but normal MAT and went on to have their ipsilateral RFFF raised without ischaemic complications. The patient with an abnormal MAT had their contralateral RFFF raised. No patients suffered ischaemic complications during the initial audit. A total of 48 patients were included in the re-audit 2 of which had an abnormal MAT and their contralateral RFFF raised. No patients suffered ischaemic complications during the re-audit. In conclusion, routine use of DUS did not provide any additional information above the MAT in identifying patients at risk of ischaemic complications.