File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: One versus two venous anastomoses in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction: a cumulative meta-analysis

TitleOne versus two venous anastomoses in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction: a cumulative meta-analysis
Authors
Keywordsfree flap
head and neck
meta-analysis
microsurgery
reconstruction
Issue Date2018
PublisherChurchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijom
Citation
International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2018, v. 47 n. 5, p. 585-594 How to Cite?
AbstractVenous compromise is still the most common cause of free flap failure. The use of two venous anastomoses has been advocated to reduce venous compromise. However, the effectiveness of this approach remains controversial. A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis was performed to assess the effect of one versus two venous anastomoses on venous compromise and free flap failure in head and neck microsurgical reconstruction. A total of 27 articles reporting 7389 flaps were included in this study. On comparison of one versus two venous anastomoses, the odds ratio (OR) for flap failure was 1.66 (95% confidence interval 1.11-2.50; P=0.014) and for venous compromise was 1.50 (95% confidence interval 1.10-2.05; P=0.011), suggesting a significant increase in the flap failure rate and venous compromise rate in the single venous anastomosis group. These results show that the execution of two venous anastomoses has significant effects on reducing the vascular compromise and free flap failure rate in head and neck reconstruction.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/259157
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 1.563
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 0.854

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChristianto, S-
dc.contributor.authorLau, A-
dc.contributor.authorLi, KY-
dc.contributor.authorYang, WF-
dc.contributor.authorSu, Y-
dc.date.accessioned2018-09-03T04:02:27Z-
dc.date.available2018-09-03T04:02:27Z-
dc.date.issued2018-
dc.identifier.citationInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2018, v. 47 n. 5, p. 585-594-
dc.identifier.issn0901-5027-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/259157-
dc.description.abstractVenous compromise is still the most common cause of free flap failure. The use of two venous anastomoses has been advocated to reduce venous compromise. However, the effectiveness of this approach remains controversial. A systematic review and cumulative meta-analysis was performed to assess the effect of one versus two venous anastomoses on venous compromise and free flap failure in head and neck microsurgical reconstruction. A total of 27 articles reporting 7389 flaps were included in this study. On comparison of one versus two venous anastomoses, the odds ratio (OR) for flap failure was 1.66 (95% confidence interval 1.11-2.50; P=0.014) and for venous compromise was 1.50 (95% confidence interval 1.10-2.05; P=0.011), suggesting a significant increase in the flap failure rate and venous compromise rate in the single venous anastomosis group. These results show that the execution of two venous anastomoses has significant effects on reducing the vascular compromise and free flap failure rate in head and neck reconstruction.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherChurchill Livingstone. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijom-
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-
dc.subjectfree flap-
dc.subjecthead and neck-
dc.subjectmeta-analysis-
dc.subjectmicrosurgery-
dc.subjectreconstruction-
dc.titleOne versus two venous anastomoses in microsurgical head and neck reconstruction: a cumulative meta-analysis-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.identifier.emailSu, Y: richsu@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authoritySu, Y=rp01916-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijom.2018.01.006-
dc.identifier.pmid29395670-
dc.identifier.hkuros289742-
dc.identifier.volume47-
dc.identifier.issue5-
dc.identifier.spage585-
dc.identifier.epage594-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats