PDF herunterladen
J Reconstr Microsurg 2003; 19(8): 567-570
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-815644
Copyright © 2003 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA. Tel.: +1(212) 584-4662

The “Sun Window” - A Simple and Effective Alternative to the Use of Background Contrast Material During Microvascular Anastomosis

Tzong-Bor Sun1 , Lee-Ping Hsu2 , Peir-Rong Chen2
  • 1Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital and School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
  • 2Department of Otolaryngology, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital and School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
Weitere Informationen

Publikationsverlauf

Publikationsdatum:
14. Januar 2004 (online)

    Lizenzen und Reprints

ABSTRACT

A new and simple alternative method, the “Sun window,” is introduced for creating a comfortable environment while doing microvascular anastomoses. A prospective randomized study, analyzing the anastomosis time for 34 free radial forearm flaps, was conducted to validate the effectiveness of this method. The time required for doing anastomoses with and without a “Sun window” are 8.74 ± 1.46 and 10.36 ± 1.20, respectively, p < 0.01. The results demonstrated that the “Sun window” is an effective method for promoting the patency rate and accuracy of microvascular anastomosis.

KEYWORDS

Sun window - background - microvascular anastomosis

REFERENCES

  • 1 Jones T R, Jones N F. Advance in reconstruction of the upper aerodigestive tract and cranial base with free tissue transfer.  Clin Plast Surg . 1992;  19 819-831
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Neligan P C, Mulholland S, Irish J. et al . Flap selection in cranial base reconstruction.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1996;  98 1159-1196
    Google Scholar
  • 3 Sun T B, Lee T T, Chien S H. Surgical reconstruction for buccal cancer in eastern Taiwan.  Tzu Chi Med J . 1999;  11 131-138
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Talesnik A, Markowitz B, Calcaterra T. et al . Cost and outcome of osteocutaneous free-tissue transfer versus pedicled soft-tissue reconstruction for composite mandibular defects.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1996;  97 1167-1178
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Stern J R, Keller A J, Wenig B L. Evaluation of reconstructive techniques of oropharyngeal defects.  Ann Plast Surg . 1989;  22 332-336
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 O'Brien B M, Henderson P N, Bennett R C. et al . Microvascular surgical technique.  Med J Austr . 1970;  1 722-725
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 O'Brien B M, Morrison W A, Gumley G J. Principles and techniques of microvascular surgery. In: McCarthy JG, ed. Plastic Surgery Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1990: 412-473
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Isogai N, Kamiishi H. Usefulness of the silicone microsurgical background.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1989;  84 366-367
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Terzis J, Faibisoff B, Williams H B. Use of polyethylene bag background in microsurgical repair of peripheral nerves.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1974;  53 596-597
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Rasheed T, Gordon D. Plastic innovations: background material for microvascular anastomosis.  Br J Plast Surg . 1999;  52 159
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Mulholland S, Boyd J B, McCabe S. et al . Recipient vessels in head and neck microsurgery: radiation effect and vessel access.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1993;  92 628-632
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
      >