Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_3600_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана
.pdf
Contents
Part I Introduction to Reconstructive Microsurgery
1 Microsurgery Essentials: Preconditions, Instrumentation, and Setup . . . . . . . . . 3
Alberto Ballestín and Sandra Shurey
2 Basic and Advanced Microvascular Anastomotic Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Alberto Ballestín and Yelena Akelina
3 Decision-Making in Flap Surgery: Reconstructive Ladder Versus Elevator . . . . 19
Mohammed Farid, Thessa Friebel, and Dariush Nikkhah
4 Assessment of Flap Perfusion: Microvascular Flowmetry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Joshua Luck
5 Re-exploration, Complications and Flap Salvage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
Paul Caine, Johann A. Jeevaratnam, Adam Misky, and Dariush Nikkhah
6 The Use of Ultrasound Technology in Planning Perforator Flaps
and Lymphatic Surgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Giuseppe Visconti, Alessandro Bianchi, Akitatsu Hayashi,
and Marzia Salgarello
7 Novel Microscopic Technologies in Reconstructive
Microsurgery/Microvascular Surgery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55
Michalis Hadjiandreou and Georgios Patanis
8 Robotic Microvascular and Free Flap Surgery: Overview of Current Robotic
Applications and Introduction of a Dedicated Robot for Microsurgery . . . . . . . . 77
Joost A. G. N. Wolfs, Rutger M. Schols, and Tom J. M. van Mulken
9 Technical Tips in Microvascular Surgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Marios Nicolaides and Georgios Patanis
Part II Core Flaps
10 Temporal Artery Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99
Oliver J. Smith, Greg O’Toole, and Walid Sabbagh
11 Supraorbital and Supratrochlear Artery Flaps - Forehead
Flap and Modifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Daniel B. Saleh and Alex Dearden
12 Cervicofacial Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117
Luke Geoghegan, Dariush Nikkhah, and Tiew Chong Teo
13 Bowel Flaps - Jejunum Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123
Georgios Patanis, Shin-Heng Chen, and Hung-Chi Chen
xiii

xiv
14 Thoracodorsal Artery Flap: Latissimus Dorsi Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133
Mohammed Farid, Dariush Nikkhah, and Jeremy Rawlins
15 Thoracodorsal Artery Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Youn Hwan Kim and Lan Sook Chang
16 The Scapular Axis Flaps: An Expendable Direct Cutaneous Perforator
with Many Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165
Daniel Saleh and John Henton
17 Thoracoacromial Artery Flap: Pectoralis Major Muscle Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
Jonathan A. Dunne, Ian C. C. King, Dariush Nikkhah, and Jeremy Rawlins
18 Transverse Cervical Artery Flap - Supraclavicular Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Pedro Ciudad, Juste Kaciulyte, Georgios Patanis, and Hung-Chi Chen
19 Inferior Epigastric Artery Flap: Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery
Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Alexandra O’Neill, Dariush Nikkhah, Ahmed M. Yassin, and Bernard Luczak
20 Inferior and Superior Epigastric Artery Flaps:
The Rectus Abdominis Muscle Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
Matthew Wordsworth, Dariush Nikkhah, Alex Woollard, and Norbert Kang
21 Superficial Inferior Epigastric Artery and Superficial Circumflex
Iliac Artery Perforator Combined Flaps. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213
Hidehiko Yoshimatsu, Yuma Fuse, Ryo Karakawa, and Akitatsu Hayashi
Contents
22 Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
Mohammed Farid and Mohamed Shibu
23 Inferior Gluteal Artery Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227
Maleeha Mughal and Paul Roblin
24 The Lumbar Artery Perforator Flap: A True Alternative
in Autologous Breast Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
Filip B. J. L. Stillaert, Phillip Blondeel, and Koenraad Van Landuyt
25 Right Gastroepiploic Artery: Omental Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 243
Vladimir Anikin and Katherine de Rome
26 Dorsal Metacarpal Artery Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249
Prateush Singh, Andreas Georgiou, Julia Ruston, and Dariush Nikkhah
27 Digital Artery Flaps: Homodigital and Heterodigital Island Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . 259
Sirke Rinkoff, Julia Ruston, and Dariush Nikkhah
28 Radial Forearm Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271
Shahriar Raj Zaman, Qadir Khan, Jeremy M. Rawlins, Allan Ponniah,
and Dariush Nikkhah
29 Posterior Interosseous Artery Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281
Douglas Copson, Dariush Nikkhah, and Mark Pickford
30 Venous Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289
Christopher Deutsch and Jamil Moledina
31 Free Thenar Flap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
Dimitris Reissis, Petr Vondra, and Zheng Yumao

Contents
xv
32 Medial and Lateral Arm Fasciocutaneous Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .305
Katerina Kyprianou, Georgios Patanis, Dajiang Song, and Youmao Zhen
33 The Groin Flap: The Workhorse Flap for Upper Limb Reconstruction . . . . . . . . 313
Hari Venkatramani, David Zargaran, Dariush Nikkhah, Julia Ruston,
and S. Raja Sabapathy
34 Superficial Circumflex Iliac Artery Perforator Flap: A Thin
and Versatile Option for Limb and Head and Neck Reconstruction . . . . . . . . . . . 325
Juan Enrique Berner, Dariush Nikkhah, and Tiew Chong Teo
35 Lateral Circumflex Femoral Artery—Anterolateral Thigh Flap:
Anterolateral Thigh Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333
Robert Miller, Dariush Nikkhah, Edmund Fitzgerald O’Connor,
and Jeremy Rawlins
36 Transverse Upper Gracilis (TUG) Flap: A Reliable Alternative
for Breast Reconstruction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .343
Juan Enrique Berner and Adam Blackburn
37 Medial Circumflex Femoral Artery: Gracilis Muscle Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 353
Robert Miller, Dariush Nikkhah, and Graeme Glass
38 Profunda Artery Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 365
Tomoyuki Yano
39 Medial Femoral Condyle Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373
Anthony L. Logli and Alexander Y. Shin
40 Medial Sural Artery Perforator Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
Dimitris Reissis, Dariush Nikkhah, Bernard Luczak, and Georgios Orfaniotis
41 Peroneal Artery Flaps: The Free Fibula Flap. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397
Amitabh Thacoor, Daniel Butler, Dariush Nikkhah, and Jeremy Rawlins
42 Posterior Tibial and Peroneal Perforators Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 409
Ahmed M. Yassin, Muholan Kanapathy, and Georgios Patanis
43 Second Toe Free Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419
Dariush Nikkhah, Juan Enrique Berner, Petr Vondra, Bran Sivakumar,
and Mark Pickford
44 Great Toe Flaps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429
Dariush Nikkhah and Norbert Kang
45 The Medial Plantar Flap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 443
Alexander E. J. Trevatt, Miguel A. Johnson, and Tiew C. Teo
Part III Common Recipient Vessels
46 Chest Wall Recipient Vessels Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 455
Pennylouise Hever, Dariush Nikkhah, Alexandra Molina, and Martin Jones
47 Head and Neck Recipient Vessels Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465
Alexandra O’Neill, Juan Enrique Berner, and Georgios Patanis
48 Upper Limb Recipient Vessels Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .473
Zhi Yang Ng, Calum Honeyman, Amir Sadr, and Dariush Nikkhah

xvi
49 Lower Limb Recipient Vessels Access . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 481
Yezen Sheena, Georgios Patanis, Dariush Nikkhah,
Edmund Fitzgerald O’Connor, and Jeremy Rawlins
50 Lymphatic Supermicrosurgery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 489
Takumi Yamamoto and Nana Yamamoto
Part IV Appendix
51 Cadaveric Anatomy: Microvascular Flaps Dissection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 499
Georgios Patanis, Dajiang Song, and Youmao Zheng
Contents

List of Videos
Video 5.1 Hyperaemia in the immediate post-operative period following great toe to hand
transfer
Video 5.2 Demonstration of a congested gracilis ap in a lower limb ap reconstruction
Video 14.1 This video narrated by Dr Dariush Nikkhah demonstrates the elevation of a Free
LD ap for extremity reconstruction
Video 19.1 Narrated video demonstrating tips and tricks on DIEP ap elevation, recipient ves-
sel preparation, microsurgery (arterial anastomosis and Venous anastomosis with
Vein coupler) and inset. Case performed and narrated by Dariush Nikkhah
Video 22.1 SGAP ap elevation, demonstrating good capillary rell and pulsating perforator.
Flap is rotated into perineum
Video 22.2 SGAP ap de epitheliasation before transfer as a propeller ap to obliterate dead
space in perineum
Video 29.1 Identication of ECU/EDM septum by exion and extension of the little nger
during PIA ap harvest
Video 29.2 Large SCC of the right thumb necessitating amputation and coverage with a
reverse PIA ap
Video 34.1 SCIP ap raising technique demonstration (Part 1)
Video 34.2 SCIP ap raising technique demonstration (part 2)
Video 35.1 A demonstration of the de-roong technique in ALT ap harvest
Video 35.2 Post operative outcome for upper limb defect reconstruction with an ALT ap
Video 35.3 This video narrated by Dr Dariush Nikkhah demonstrated an overview of the ALT
ap raise
Video 37.1 This video demonstrates the post-operative outcome from a free functional gracilis
muscle transfer for elbow reanimation after a brachial plexus injury
Video 41.1 Demonstration of an osteotomy of a bula ap whilst protecting the underlying
pedicle with a malleable retractor
Video 41.2 Narrated video by Dr Dariush Nikkhah demonstrating steps in raising a osteocu-
taneous free bula ap to reconstruct the mandible in a patient with a large odon-
togenic myxoma
Video 43.1 This narrated video by Dr. Dariush Nikkhah, Juan Berner and TC Teo demon-
strates a second toe to hand transfer for thumb reconstruction
Video 44.1 Demonstration of dexterity after the great toe transfer by passing a coin between
the reconstructed thumb and opposing digits
Video 44.2 Demonstration of circumduction of the great toe transfer
Video 49.1 Preoperative markings in planning a free ap reconstruction of the right lateral
ankle. The surgeon is planning extension along the fasciotomy lines to access the
anterior tibial vessels
xvii

Part I
Introduction to Reconstructive Microsurgery

Microsurgery Essentials: Preconditions,
Instrumentation, andSetup
AlbertoBallestín andSandraShurey
1
1.1 Introduction
Reconstructive microsurgery is the surgical technique that
uses the optical magnication of a microscope, the precision
of specic instruments, and the accuracy of small sutures
(8/0 to 13/0) to achieve ne dissections and free tissue transfers by performing vascular and nerve anastomoses of small
diameter. Although nowadays microsurgery is a fundamental
part of reconstructive surgery, it has a relatively short but
intense history.
The development of reconstructive microsurgery was primarily inuenced by advances in vascular surgery. The main
vascular anastomosis techniques were not described until the
beginning of the twentieth century until the experimental
work of Carrel and Guthrie [1]. Later, in 1921, the microscope was introduced for the rst time in surgery by the otolaryngologist Nylen [2]. Then, the progressive improvement
of microscopes, together with the synthesis of anticoagulants
and antibiotics, laid the necessary foundations for surgeons
Julius H.Jacobson and Ernesto L.Suárez to perform the rst
vascular anastomoses in vessels of 1 mm diameter in the
1960s [3]. Subsequently, rst successes were obtained in
replantation of severed body parts during the following years
[4]. During that period, Harry J.Buncke and other pioneers
carried out innovative studies on replantation and tissue
transplants in animals, developing many of the basic principles of this discipline [5]. After years of research, the rst
free tissue transfer was performed on a patient in 1972 [6].
Since then, a multitude of designs and techniques have been
described for performing free tissue transfers and microsurgical repairs which are used in countless procedures: replantation, transplantation, neurosurgery, limb reconstruction,
A. Ballestín (*)
Tumor Microenvironment Laboratory, Institut Curie, Paris, France
S. Shurey
MicroShure Ltd, Brixham, England, UK
head and neck surgery, breast reconstruction, peripheral
nerve surgery, lymphedema, etc.
Microsurgery has ostensibly improved the treatment of
patients affected by a wide range of tissue defects. In this
book chapter, we rst describe the necessary materials for
microsurgery, such as specic instruments, optical magnication, and sutures. Then, we detail the microsuture techniques, the main formal training programs, and some
different microsurgical setups.
1.2 Surgical Magnication: Loupes
andMicroscopes
Microscopy is an integral part of reconstructive surgery but
also of many other surgical disciplines nowadays.
Otolaryngology was the rst discipline to incorporate the
microscope into its surgeries [2], ophthalmology added illumination [7], and neurosurgery allowed the use of infrared
and other wavelength cameras to use contrast-enhancing
techniques for specic anatomical structure visualization
[8]. The technical evolution of surgical microscopy over
decades has been impressive and very useful for surgeons.
The microscopic magnication of the surgical eld improves
visual acuity and enhances precise treatments. Small anatomical details are appreciated allowing the performance of
ne dissections and microsuture techniques in a precise and
easier way nowadays.
In reconstructive surgery, a surgeon’s rst introduction to
magnication is usually with the use of surgical loupes.
Magnifying loupes are tremendously useful for dissections
that do not require great magnication capacity but require
working in large or distant surgical approaches. However,
when high magnication is required to perform microsurgery,
the use of a microscope is essential, as loupes typically have
2.5–5× magnication, while microscopes provide 2–40×
magnication. In addition, the ergonomic improvements of
microscopes, the variation of the magnication and its high-
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023
D. Nikkhah et al. (eds.), Core Techniques in Flap Reconstructive Microsurgery, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-07678-7_1
3

4
A. Ballestín and S. Shurey
quality visualization, allow the performance of procedures
with high precision that are not possible to perform with surgical loupes. However, surgical loupes are portable, easy to
use, and cost-effective compared to surgical microscopes [9].
1.2.1 Surgical Loupes
Surgical loupes are very useful when high magnication is not
required but an improvement in technical precision is needed.
Three different optical systems can be used for its manufacture: simple, compound (Galilean), and prismatic [10].
• Simple loupes consist of a single meniscus lens; they are
not currently marketed by almost any company since the
other two systems are better.
• Compound (Galilean) loupe systems are the most common; they are made up of two magnifying lenses separated from each other. Compared to the simple system,
the Galilean system offers greater magnication, greater
depth of view, and longer working distances.
• Prismatic loupes consist of a more complex optical system that provide higher magnication and typically longer working distances than simple and compound loupes.
However, its weight is greater, as well as its cost.
Regarding the placement of the loupes on the glasses,
there are two types of designs: through-the-lens (TTL) and
ip-up loupes (Fig. 1.1). They are different; the choice of
surgical loupes should be based on personal preferences prioritizing surgical-specic needs. Both designs have advantages and disadvantages when compared.
• TTL: It is a custom design of loupes, which are mounted
through the lens of the glasses depending on the user’s
specic interpupillary distance. The loupes are posi-
tioned at a steep declination angle to the eyeglass lenses
to allow the user to achieve an ergonomic posture during
surgery.
• Flip-up loupes: It is a foldable design of loupes that have
the optics attached to a hinge mechanism. This system
allows magnifying lenses to be moved out or in to work
with or without magnication. They are cheaper than
TTL, and usually interpupillary variation is possible;
therefore they can be used by surgeons with different
interpupillary distances. However, TTL loupes offer a
wider eld of view than ip-up loupes, because lenses are
closer to the user’s eyes, which means that users can see a
larger area of surgical eld than with the same magnication with ip-up loupes.
Loupes are usually available with a xed magnication
between 2.5× and 5×, although there are some allowing more
magnication. However, for all optical systems, the higher
the magnication of the loupes, the greater their weight, the
smaller the eld of view, and the narrower the depth of focus
becomes.
It is also possible to use a light source with surgical
loupes. Usually the light source is connected by cable to a
battery that can be carried in surgeon’s pocket, but there are
also rechargeable or battery-powered models that have the
batteries in the temple of the glasses.
Loupes offer exibility, portability, and lower cost
compared to microscopes. However, they offer lower
magnication power and do not have coaxial illumination,
and surgeon’s ergonomics are much poorer. The working
distance of surgical loupes is xed; therefore, surgeon
must nd a correct position to obtain a focused view. This
can lead to improper body positions causing neck and
back fatigue and even leading to musculoskeletal
injuries.
abc
Fig. 1.1 Different types of surgical loupes. (a) Through-the-lens Galilean loupes (2.5×). (b) Through-the-lens variable magnication loupes
(2.5×–3.5×–4.5×). (c) Flip-up Galilean loupes (2.5×). (Images courtesy of Optimedic)

1 Microsurgery Essentials: Preconditions, Instrumentation, andSetup
1.2.2 Surgical Microscope
Surgical microscopes allow for stereoscopic vision and
therefore for in-depth orientation. This, in turn, allows safe
and precise use of instruments and improves ergonomics,
since it can be operated while maintaining an upright position, preventing fatigue and postural alterations that could
lead to muscle strain or injury.
To use surgical instruments on the patient using a microscope, a certain distance is required between the surgical
approach and the main lens of the microscope. This space is
called the working distance. In reconstructive microsurgery,
the working distance is generally between 200 and 400mm
and must be adapted in each situation regarding the surgeon
to maintain a correct working posture.
The magnication factor of a microscope is variable and
allows varying between 1.5× and 30× magnications.
Microscopes permit modifying the magnication/zoom during surgery, maintaining the focal length while having a
relaxed posture for the surgeon.
Microscopes also allow variation of the working distance,
allowing to evaluate different anatomical planes with good
focus and high image quality. Thus, it makes the surgeon
work in a comfortable way.
Today the surgical microscope (Fig.1.2) is indispensable
in reconstructive surgery. Its main parts are:
• Binocular tubes. They are mobile to adapt the interpupil-
lary distance of the surgeon. It is also possible to regulate
the diopters; for this, it is recommended that each eye bin-
ocular is individually focused to achieve maximum visual
acuity.
• To facilitate ergonomics, usually 180° tiltable binocular
tubes are used; also it can be turned about its optical
axis. The wideeld eyepieces usually have 10× or 12.5×
providing magnication. Usually there are two binocu-
lars, allowing face-to-face surgery by two surgeons.
The mounting of three or four binoculars is also possi-
ble in some microscopes if further assistance was
needed.
• Variation system. Progressive zoom allows going from
low to high magnication during surgery.
• Lens of the main objective. It largely denes the image
quality, and its positioning usually sets the focal length
ranging from 100 to 400mm.
5
Fig. 1.2 Surgical microscope. (Courtesy of Leica)
• Coaxial eld lighting, which usually is halogen or xenon
light.
• Camera to record procedures and take images to follow
up surgeries.
• Some models have an infrared camera that allows, through
the use of contrasts such as ICG (Indocyanine Green), to
evaluate the lymphatic system or to perform intraoperative angiography.
• Pedal. It allows movement in XY without manipulating
the stand with the hands; it also allows ordering the taking
of images or video, as well as launching programs for
evaluation with an infrared camera.
1.2.3 Heads-Up 3D Microscopy
andExoscopes
New 3D heads-up microscopes (Fig.1.3) have made it possible
to improve the comfort of the microsurgeon since they allow to
operate sitting or standing with the head up, without compromising the quality of the image or the technical accuracy [11].
Although its use has been anecdotal, exoscopes provide
a high-denition image of the eld from a digital camera
system projected onto a 2D or 3D high-resolution monitor
[12, 13].

6
Fig. 1.4 Microsurgery instrument set. (Courtesy of Mercian)
A. Ballestín and S. Shurey
since precision is reduced. Angled microsurgical forceps can
also be used as needle holders to handle very small sutures as
they are less bulky and allow ne handling.
Microsurgical forceps no. 3 and 5 are essential in any
microsurgical instrument set. Their tips should evenly coincide over a length of 2mm so that the 10/0 and 11/0 nylon
thread can be easily collected without damaging it. These
microforceps can be straight, angled, or curved.
Fig. 1.3 3D heads-up microscopes. (Courtesy of Mitaka)
1.3 Microsurgical Equipment,
Instruments, andSutures
Specic and high-quality instruments are key to the performance and precision of microsurgical techniques. Each
instrument should have a satin nish to avoid glare under the
microscope and should be long enough to rest properly in the
surgeon’s hands. Some instruments are spring-loaded; on
these instruments the closing tension should be gentle
enough to avoid fatigue.
A set of microsurgical instruments (Fig.1.4) should contain microneedle holder, straight and curved Dumont forceps, vasodilator forceps, microscissors, clamps,
microvascular clamp applicator, and sutures.
Needle holders usually have spring-loaded handles that can
have a round or at grip. The ne tips can be curved, angled,
or straight. The tip should be ne enough to hold the needle
without distorting its curve during use. Needle holders with
lock ratchets should not be used because the release of the
lock makes impossible to control the movement; therefore, it
can be a problem when working with high magnication
Vasodilator forceps are modied forceps, and at the tip they
are rounded and polished, so they can be inserted into the
end of a cut vessel, and through their gentle opening, counterpressure is provided while suturing. Furthermore, vasodilation prior to the anastomosis performance can facilitate the
procedure.
Microscissors should have a spring handle, and curved or
straight blades can be short or long depending on personal
preference. The tips should be rounded so that the tissues
adjacent to the vessels can be dissected without damaging
them.
The adventitia scissors are similar, but with straight and
sharp blades; they are used to remove the adventitia from the
vessels and/or remove the sutures made.
Microvascular clamps are used to block blood ow;
depending on the diameter of the vessel, a different clamp
must be chosen. Caution must be exercised during use; blood
on the clamp joint can render them ineffective.
Clamp applicator forceps are specically designed for the
proper handling of microvascular clamps.
Microsurgical sutures must be inert and antithrombogenic.
That is why nonabsorbable synthetic monolaments are
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
