Американское общество гирудотерапии

Current evidence for postoperative monitoring of microvascular free flaps: a systematic review.

Review published in Annals of plastic surgery (2015)

Последнее обновление: June 18, 2026Рецензент: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Systematic reviewКлинические исследованияChae et al. · Annals of plastic surgery, 2015

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite a plethora of monitoring techniques reported in the literature, only a small number of studies directly address clinical relevant end points, such as the flap salvage rate and false-positive rate. METHOD: We conducted a systematic review of current evidence regarding the postoperative monitoring of microvascular free-tissue transfer via extensive electronic and manual search and perusing databases, such as PubMed, Cochrane, American College of Physicians (ACP) Journal Club, Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Excerpta Medica Database (EMBASE), and Ovid MEDLINE. The included literature (n = 184 publications) was critically appraised using March 2009 Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine definitions, focusing on the evidence for the efficacy of each technique in improving the flap salvage rate of compromised flaps. RESULT: There is a paucity of outcome-based studies, with only implanted Doppler probes, near-infrared spectroscopy, laser Doppler flowmetry, quantitative fluorimetry, and digital photography assessment using smartphones having been demonstrated in comparative studies to improve flap salvage rate. Currently, the implantable Doppler probe is the technique with the largest number of comparative studies and case series to demonstrate its effectiveness compared with clinical monitoring. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies need to evaluate the most promising monitoring techniques further with a focus on assessing clinically relevant outcomes, such as the flap salvage rate and the false-positive rate, and not simple clinical series reporting patient and physician satisfaction.

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

Publication typeJournal ArticleSystematic Review
Indexed MeSH termsBody TemperatureFluorometryFree Tissue FlapsGraft SurvivalHumansMicrodialysisMobile ApplicationsMonitoring, PhysiologicOximetryPhotographyPhotoplethysmographyPostoperative Care

Резюме

Despite a plethora of monitoring techniques reported in the literature, only a small number of studies directly address clinical relevant end points, such as the flap salvage rate and false-positive rate. We conducted a systematic review of current evidence regarding the postoperative monitoring of...

Почему это важно для гирудотерапии

This systematic review evaluated evidence for postoperative monitoring techniques of microvascular free flaps across 184 publications, identifying implanted Doppler probes, near-infrared spectroscopy, laser Doppler flowmetry, quantitative fluorimetry, and smartphone-based digital photography as techniques with comparative evidence for improving flap salvage rates. The abstract contains no mention of leeches, hirudin, or hirudotherapy, and no defensible connection to ASH's domain can be drawn from the study as described. Caveat: the authors note a paucity of outcome-based studies and call for future research focused on clinically relevant endpoints such as flap salvage and false-positive rates; the leech relevance is nil.

Цитирование

Current evidence for postoperative monitoring of microvascular free flaps: a systematic review.

Chae et al. · Annals of plastic surgery, 2015

Связанный клинический контекст

Узнайте, как это исследование связано с клинической практикой

Добавлено в библиотеку ASH: May 28, 2026 · Последнее обновление сайта: June 18, 2026

Этот сайт предоставляет образовательную информацию и не является медицинской консультацией, диагнозом или рекомендацией по лечению. Гирудотерапия сопряжена с клинически значимыми рисками и должна проводиться только квалифицированными клиницистами в рамках институционально утверждённых протоколов. Разрешение FDA 510(k) для медицинских пиявок ограничено определёнными показаниями; обсуждения исследовательского и нелицензионного применения отмечены соответствующим образом. Для индивидуальных медицинских рекомендаций обратитесь к квалифицированному медицинскому специалисту.