File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Conference Paper: Single versus double venous anastomoses in head and neck reconstruction: systematic review and cumulative meta analysis

TitleSingle versus double venous anastomoses in head and neck reconstruction: systematic review and cumulative meta analysis
Authors
Issue Date2017
PublisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijom
Citation
23rd International Conference on Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (ICOMS), Hong Kong, 31 March - 3 April 2017. In International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2017, v. 46 n. Suppl. 1, p. 119 How to Cite?
AbstractBackground: The most common flap complication that causes flap failure is mainly due to venous thrombosis. Double venous anastomoses have been advocated in reducing the risk of venous compromise and flap failure. However, this procedure still remains controversial. Objective: The author conducted a cumulative meta-analysis to determine the benefits of double venous anastomoses in head and neck reconstruction. Methods: A literature search was conducted in accordance to the PRISMA checklist. Odds ratio (OR) was used for comparison. Statistical heterogeneity evaluation was performed using I2. If heterogeneity was non-significant, the fixed-effects model was used; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. Results: 24 articles with 6517 flaps were included in this cumulative meta-analysis. In view of venous compromise, single venous anastomoses group had a significant higher incidence compared to the double venous anastomoses (OR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.45; P = 0.004). In view of flap failure, the single venous anastomoses group also tended to have a higher incidence compared to double venous anastomoses (OR = 1.69; 95% CI = 1.09 to 2.62; P = 0.018). The cumulative meta-analysis effectively demonstrates a significant increase in venous compromise at the single venous anastomoses after adding trials conducted in 2014 onwards, whilst for flap failure the significant increase in single venous anastomoses was identified after adding trials in 2015 onwards. Conclusion: The cumulative meta-analysis supports the evidence that use of two venous anastomoses reduces the incidence of venous compromise and total flap failure in head and neck reconstruction.
DescriptionOral Presentation 10G Free Paper Session – Reconstructive Surgery 4 - no. OR198
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/302489
ISSN
2021 Impact Factor: 2.986
2020 SCImago Journal Rankings: 1.020

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorChristianto, S-
dc.contributor.authorLau, A-
dc.contributor.authorLi, KY-
dc.contributor.authorSu, Y-
dc.date.accessioned2021-09-06T03:33:02Z-
dc.date.available2021-09-06T03:33:02Z-
dc.date.issued2017-
dc.identifier.citation23rd International Conference on Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (ICOMS), Hong Kong, 31 March - 3 April 2017. In International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 2017, v. 46 n. Suppl. 1, p. 119-
dc.identifier.issn0901-5027-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/302489-
dc.descriptionOral Presentation 10G Free Paper Session – Reconstructive Surgery 4 - no. OR198-
dc.description.abstractBackground: The most common flap complication that causes flap failure is mainly due to venous thrombosis. Double venous anastomoses have been advocated in reducing the risk of venous compromise and flap failure. However, this procedure still remains controversial. Objective: The author conducted a cumulative meta-analysis to determine the benefits of double venous anastomoses in head and neck reconstruction. Methods: A literature search was conducted in accordance to the PRISMA checklist. Odds ratio (OR) was used for comparison. Statistical heterogeneity evaluation was performed using I2. If heterogeneity was non-significant, the fixed-effects model was used; otherwise, the random-effects model was used. Results: 24 articles with 6517 flaps were included in this cumulative meta-analysis. In view of venous compromise, single venous anastomoses group had a significant higher incidence compared to the double venous anastomoses (OR = 1.71; 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.45; P = 0.004). In view of flap failure, the single venous anastomoses group also tended to have a higher incidence compared to double venous anastomoses (OR = 1.69; 95% CI = 1.09 to 2.62; P = 0.018). The cumulative meta-analysis effectively demonstrates a significant increase in venous compromise at the single venous anastomoses after adding trials conducted in 2014 onwards, whilst for flap failure the significant increase in single venous anastomoses was identified after adding trials in 2015 onwards. Conclusion: The cumulative meta-analysis supports the evidence that use of two venous anastomoses reduces the incidence of venous compromise and total flap failure in head and neck reconstruction.-
dc.languageeng-
dc.publisherElsevier Ltd. The Journal's web site is located at http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ijom-
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery-
dc.relation.ispartof23rd International Conference on Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery (ICOMS), 2017-
dc.titleSingle versus double venous anastomoses in head and neck reconstruction: systematic review and cumulative meta analysis-
dc.typeConference_Paper-
dc.identifier.emailSu, Y: richsu@hku.hk-
dc.identifier.authoritySu, Y=rp01916-
dc.description.natureabstract-
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.ijom.2017.02.417-
dc.identifier.hkuros324684-
dc.identifier.volume46-
dc.identifier.issueSuppl. 1-
dc.identifier.spage119-
dc.identifier.epage119-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Kingdom-

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats