Amerikanische Gesellschaft für Hirudotherapie

Consensus of free flap complications: Using a nomenclature paradigm in microvascular head and neck reconstruction.

Research article published in Head & neck (2021)

Zuletzt aktualisiert: June 18, 2026Geprüft von: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Research reportKlinische StudienArzneimittelentwicklungMady et al. · Head & neck, 2021

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We aim to define a set of terms for common free flap complications with evidence-based descriptions. METHODS: Clinical consensus surveys were conducted among a panel of head and neck/reconstructive surgeons (N = 11). A content validity index for relevancy and clarity for each item was computed and adjusted for chance agreement (modified kappa, K). Items with K < 0.74 for relevancy (i.e., ratings of "good" or "fair") were eliminated. RESULTS: Five out of nineteen terms scored K < 0.74. Eliminated terms included "vascular compromise"; "cellulitis"; "surgical site abscess"; "malocclusion"; and "non- or mal-union." Terms that achieved consensus were "total/partial free flap failure"; "free flap takeback"; "arterial thrombosis"; "venous thrombosis"; "revision of microvascular anastomosis"; "fistula"; "wound dehiscence"; "hematoma"; "seroma"; "partial skin graft failure"; "total skin graft failure"; "exposed hardware or bone"; and "hardware failure." CONCLUSION: Standardized reporting would encourage multi-institutional research collaboration, larger scale quality improvement initiatives, the ability to set risk-adjusted benchmarks, and enhance education and communication.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeJournal ArticleConsensus Statement
Indexed MeSH termsFree Tissue FlapsHead and Neck NeoplasmsHumansNeckPostoperative ComplicationsPlastic Surgery ProceduresRetrospective Studies

Zusammenfassung

We aim to define a set of terms for common free flap complications with evidence-based descriptions. Clinical consensus surveys were conducted among a panel of head and neck/reconstructive surgeons (N = 11).

Warum dies für die Hirudotherapie relevant ist

This consensus statement used clinical consensus surveys among 11 head and neck/reconstructive surgeons to define standardized nomenclature for free flap complications, achieving consensus on terms including 'venous thrombosis,' 'arterial thrombosis,' and 'hematoma,' while eliminating five terms that lacked adequate inter-rater agreement. The abstract makes no mention of leeches, hirudotherapy, or leech-derived compounds. The study is focused entirely on establishing standardized terminology for surgical complication reporting and does not address any therapeutic modalities. No content in the abstract supports any relevance to hirudotherapy or the leech secretome.

Zitation

Consensus of free flap complications: Using a nomenclature paradigm in microvascular head and neck reconstruction.

Mady et al. · Head & neck, 2021

Verwandter klinischer Kontext

Zur ASH-Bibliothek hinzugefügt: May 28, 2026 · Letzte Aktualisierung der Website: June 18, 2026

Diese Website stellt Bildungsinformationen bereit und ist weder eine medizinische Beratung noch eine Diagnose oder Behandlungsempfehlung. Die medizinische Blutegeltherapie ist mit klinisch relevanten Risiken verbunden und sollte ausschließlich von qualifizierten Klinikerinnen und Klinikern unter institutionell genehmigten Protokollen durchgeführt werden. Die FDA-510(k)-Zulassung für medizinische Blutegel ist auf bestimmte Indikationen beschränkt; experimentelle und Off-Label-Diskussionen werden entsprechend gekennzeichnet. Für patientenspezifische Beratung wenden Sie sich an eine qualifizierte Gesundheitsfachkraft.