Cargando…

Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury

Aims: Pressure injury is a gradually increasing disease in the aging society. The reconstruction of a pressure ulcer requires a patient and surgical technique. The patients were exposed to the radiation risk under other ways of detection of perforators such as computed tomographic angiography and ma...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wu, Chien-Wei, Liu, Hung-Hui, Chen, Chun-Yu, Hsu, Kuo-Feng, Chou, Yu-Yu, Huang, Dun-Wei, Tzeng, Yuan-Sheng
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8875559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207621
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12020132
_version_ 1784657945651314688
author Wu, Chien-Wei
Liu, Hung-Hui
Chen, Chun-Yu
Hsu, Kuo-Feng
Chou, Yu-Yu
Huang, Dun-Wei
Tzeng, Yuan-Sheng
author_facet Wu, Chien-Wei
Liu, Hung-Hui
Chen, Chun-Yu
Hsu, Kuo-Feng
Chou, Yu-Yu
Huang, Dun-Wei
Tzeng, Yuan-Sheng
author_sort Wu, Chien-Wei
collection PubMed
description Aims: Pressure injury is a gradually increasing disease in the aging society. The reconstruction of a pressure ulcer requires a patient and surgical technique. The patients were exposed to the radiation risk under other ways of detection of perforators such as computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography. Here, we compared two radiation-free methods of a superior gluteal artery perforator (SGAP), flap harvesting and anchoring. One is the traditional method of detecting only handheld acoustic Doppler sonography (ADS) (Group 1). The other involves the assistance of intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescent near-infrared angiography (ICGFA) and handheld ADS (Group 2). Materials and Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective, observational study that included patients with sacral pressure injury grades III and IV, who had undergone reconstructive surgery with an SGAP flap between January 2019 and January 2021. Two detection methods were used intraoperatively. The main outcome measures included the operative time, estimated blood loss, major perforator detection numbers, wound condition, and incidence of complications. Results: Sixteen patients underwent an SGAP flap reconstruction. All patients were diagnosed with grade III to IV sacral pressure injury after a series of examinations. Group 1 included 8 patients with a mean operative time of 91 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 50 mL. The mean number of perforators was 4. Postoperative complications included one wound infection in one case and wound edge dehiscence in one case. No mortality was associated with this procedure. The mean total hospital stay was 16 days. Group 2 included 8 patients with a mean operative time of 107.5 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 50 mL. The mean number of perforators was 5. Postoperative complications included one wound infection. No mortality was associated with this procedure. The mean total hospital stay was 13 days. Conclusions: The combination of detection of the SGAP by ICGFA and handheld ADS for the reconstruction of a sacral pressure injury provides a more accurate method and provides the advantage of being radiation-free.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8875559
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-88755592022-02-26 Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury Wu, Chien-Wei Liu, Hung-Hui Chen, Chun-Yu Hsu, Kuo-Feng Chou, Yu-Yu Huang, Dun-Wei Tzeng, Yuan-Sheng J Pers Med Article Aims: Pressure injury is a gradually increasing disease in the aging society. The reconstruction of a pressure ulcer requires a patient and surgical technique. The patients were exposed to the radiation risk under other ways of detection of perforators such as computed tomographic angiography and magnetic resonance angiography. Here, we compared two radiation-free methods of a superior gluteal artery perforator (SGAP), flap harvesting and anchoring. One is the traditional method of detecting only handheld acoustic Doppler sonography (ADS) (Group 1). The other involves the assistance of intraoperative indocyanine green fluorescent near-infrared angiography (ICGFA) and handheld ADS (Group 2). Materials and Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective, observational study that included patients with sacral pressure injury grades III and IV, who had undergone reconstructive surgery with an SGAP flap between January 2019 and January 2021. Two detection methods were used intraoperatively. The main outcome measures included the operative time, estimated blood loss, major perforator detection numbers, wound condition, and incidence of complications. Results: Sixteen patients underwent an SGAP flap reconstruction. All patients were diagnosed with grade III to IV sacral pressure injury after a series of examinations. Group 1 included 8 patients with a mean operative time of 91 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 50 mL. The mean number of perforators was 4. Postoperative complications included one wound infection in one case and wound edge dehiscence in one case. No mortality was associated with this procedure. The mean total hospital stay was 16 days. Group 2 included 8 patients with a mean operative time of 107.5 min, and the mean estimated blood loss was 50 mL. The mean number of perforators was 5. Postoperative complications included one wound infection. No mortality was associated with this procedure. The mean total hospital stay was 13 days. Conclusions: The combination of detection of the SGAP by ICGFA and handheld ADS for the reconstruction of a sacral pressure injury provides a more accurate method and provides the advantage of being radiation-free. MDPI 2022-01-19 /pmc/articles/PMC8875559/ /pubmed/35207621 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12020132 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Wu, Chien-Wei
Liu, Hung-Hui
Chen, Chun-Yu
Hsu, Kuo-Feng
Chou, Yu-Yu
Huang, Dun-Wei
Tzeng, Yuan-Sheng
Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title_full Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title_fullStr Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title_short Comparison of Detection of Superior Gluteal Artery Perforator by Indocyanine Green Fluorescence Near-Infrared ANGIOGRAPHY and Handheld Acoustic Doppler Sonography for Reconstruction of Sacral Pressure Injury
title_sort comparison of detection of superior gluteal artery perforator by indocyanine green fluorescence near-infrared angiography and handheld acoustic doppler sonography for reconstruction of sacral pressure injury
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8875559/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35207621
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jpm12020132
work_keys_str_mv AT wuchienwei comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT liuhunghui comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT chenchunyu comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT hsukuofeng comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT chouyuyu comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT huangdunwei comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury
AT tzengyuansheng comparisonofdetectionofsuperiorglutealarteryperforatorbyindocyaninegreenfluorescencenearinfraredangiographyandhandheldacousticdopplersonographyforreconstructionofsacralpressureinjury