心理干预对断指再植术后血管危象发生率的影响

目的:探讨心理干预对断指再植患者术后血管危象发生率的影响.方法:将119例154指断指再植患者随机分为两组,观察组58例78指,对照组59例76指,对照组进行常规护理,做好患者的基础护理、生活护理等；观察组在常规基础上采取综合心理干预,记录2周内各种血管危象发生的例数,并对两组患者血管危象发生率进行评估.结果:观察组患者护理干预后的心理状况明显改善,血管危象发生率明显低于对照组(P＜0.05).结论:心理干预可明显改善断指再植患者焦虑、抑郁等不良心理状态,降低血管危象的发生.     

自控镇静对断指再植患者血管危象发生率的影响

目的 研究自控镇静（PCS）对断指再植术后血管危象发生率的影响.方法 本组232例断指再植患者,随机分为P组（n=130）与C组（n=102）.两组均采用连续腋路臂丛麻醉,术后行腋路臂丛阻滞镇痛.P组术后以咪唑安定复合芬太尼行PCS,C组术后给予心理护理,必要时应用镇静剂,两组镇痛镇静时间均为72 h.观察患者镇痛（VAS）镇静（Ramsay）评分、焦虑评分（SAS）、再植指血管危象发生及成活情况、PCS期间生命体征及不良反应发生情况.结果 P组术后各时间点的Ramsay评分均高于C组（P＜0.01）,镇静不足病例P组明显少于C组;两组VAS评分差异无显著性;SAS评分P组明显低于C组（P＜0.01）,焦虑发生率P组明显低于C组（P＜0.01）;P组血管危象发生率明显低于C组（P＜0.05）;两组PCS期间生命体征均平稳,无恶心、呕吐、低血压、呼吸抑制等不良反应发生.结论 PCS能够为断指再植患者术后提供安全有效的镇静治疗,从而降低血管危象的发生率.     

不缩短指骨显微外科末节断指再植术治疗末节断指疗效及对再植成活率、血管危象的影响

目的探讨不缩短指骨显微外科末节断指再植术治疗末节断指的疗效及对再植成活率、血管危象的影响。方法选取2013-07—2016-07间洛阳正骨医院收治的50例末节断指患者,均实施不缩短指骨的显微外科末节断指再植术。回顾性分析患者的临床资料。结果断指成活率为96.49%。共有6指(10.53%)发生血管危象,其中2指(3.51%)最终坏死。存活指中再植优良率为94.55%。结论不缩短指骨显微外科末节断指再植术治疗末节断指,疗效显著,再植成活率高,血管危象发生率较低。     

吸烟对再植断指血管危象发生率影响的临床观察

目的 探讨吸烟对断指再植术后血管危象发生率的影响及机制。方法 观察吸烟后发生血管危象比率;分析血管危象发生时间、处理结果;比较吸烟方式对血管危象发生的影响。结果 吸烟显著增加再植断指血管危象发生率,被动吸烟者超过主动吸烟者;血管危象大多(94．87％)发生在14日内,其中85．33％为动脉危象,6．67％为静脉危象,8．0％为混合危象;血管痉挛因素明显高于血栓因素。结论 吸烟极易诱发血管危象;指动脉顽固性痉挛、血液粘稠度增加是吸烟导致血管危象的主要病理机制。     

针刺放血预防断指再植术后血管危象

血管危象是断指再植术后最常见并发症,也是影响手术成败的最主要因素.因此,有效地预防和治疗断指再植术后血管危象,已成为手外科领域的一项重要任务[1].我院根据近年来的临床经验,自2007年1月至12月根据指腹颜色、皮肤张力及毛细血管充盈时间等对35例断指再植患者行术后皮肤全层针刺放血,起到有效避免血管危象及断指全部成活的良好效果,现报道如下.     

末节断指再植术后血管危象的危险因素

目的分析末节断指再植术后发生血管危象的危险因素,为预防血管危象的发生提供理论依据.方法总结65指末节断指再植病例,统计患者性别、年龄、指别、优势手别、伤因、断指缺血时间、断指保存方式、离断平面、血小板检测值、再植顺序、动脉修复方式、静脉回流方式、是否发生血管危象等因素,进行t检验、秩和检验或X2检验等单因素分析并行多因素Logistic回归分析,判定再植术后血管危象发生的危险因素.结果 65指末节断指再植术后有13指发生血管危象,发生率为20%.单因素分析结果表明,发生血管危象患者血小板检测值显著高于未发生者(P<0.01).静脉回流方式(P＜0.05)、伤因(P＜0.05)、断指保存方式(P<0.05)、年龄(P＜0.01)与血管危象发生有关.多因素Logistic回归分析,血小板检测值(OR=1.015,P＜0.05)、年龄(OR=0.349,P＜0.05)、静脉回流方式(OR=0.278,P＜0.05)是血管危象发生的独立预测因素.6岁以下患儿血管危象发生率达61.5%,显著高于其他年龄组(P＜0.05);单纯吻合静脉重建回流方式者危象发生率为43.8%,显著高于其他方法组(P＜0.01).结论年龄、血小板水平以及静脉回流方式是影响末节断指再植术后血管危象发生的独立预测因素.术中根据具体伤情决定合适的静脉回流方式,术后加强抗凝治疗及对高危人群的观察对预防末节断指再植术后血管危象的发生有一定意义.     

手指末节撕脱离断再植术后血管危象的识别及处理

目的 探讨拇、手指末节旋转撕脱离断伤术后血管危象及坏死的识别及处理,为临床提供参考.方法 对10例12指拇、手指末节旋转撕脱离断再植的患者,术后3～4d出现血管危象及坏死,通过延长甲床渗血时间,指腹侧方小切口放血,加强换药和显微外科用药等方法积极处理.一般观察到2周左右,拆除缝线,去除末端指体黑痂,即可发现指体表面颜色红润.结果 再植12指均存活,术后随访时间为6～36个月,平均26个月.所有患者对再植指外观及功能满意,指腹两点分辨觉达3.2～5.0 mm,平均4.2mm,感觉恢复至S3～S3+.按中华医学会手外科学会断指再植功能评定试用标准评定:优8指,良4指,优良率为100％.结论 拇、手指末节旋转撕脱离断伤术后血管危象及假性坏死并不少见,正确的处理有助于提高手术的成功率,减少截指率.     

自我效能增强干预对断指再植成活率的影响

2005年3月～2008年10月,我院共收治断指患者90例(118指),运用自我效能增强干预对47例断指再植患者进行治疗观察,结果报道如下.     

断指再植术发生血管危象的原因分析及防治措施

目的 探讨断指再植术发生血管危象的原因及预防和处理方法,提高再植的成活率.方法 观察不同时间、不同环境条件下进行再植98例132指发生血管危象情况,回顾分析其原因并针对性提出有效的预防措施和处理方法.结果 2006年3月至2007年6月再植49例65指,术中及术后发生血管危象分别为35指和19指,经用温生理盐水、局部注射罂粟碱等保守处理,对不缓解的再植指手术探查,成活58指,成功率89.2%.2007年7月至2009年3月再植49例67指,术中及术后发生血管危象分别为10指和5指,先经保守处理,对不缓解的再植指手术探查,血运恢复后经屈指肌腱鞘植入PCA泵给药防止术后血管危象的发生,成活66指,成功率98.5%.术后9例失访,89例随访时间为6～8个月.手指功能恢复良好.结论 良好充分的麻醉和保持适宜的术中环境温度是预防断指再植术发生血管危象的有效手段,重视血管危象的预防和处理可有效提高再植成活率.     

Clinical outcomes of salvage revision surgery following finger replantation with vascular insufficiency: A retrospective study

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to analyze the outcomes of revision surgery following replantation of single digital amputations.MethodsIn this study, first, a total of 403 patients (339 male, 64 female; mean age=28 years; age range=1–76) in whom a single finger replantation was performed were retrospectively reviewed, and then 60 patients with arterial or venous insufficiency in whom revision surgery was performed were reanalyzed. The second finger was observed to be the most injured one (32.8%). Injury type was classified as clean cut (25.3%), local crush (38.7), extensive crush (7.9%), and avulsion (28.1%). When taking the levels of injuries of the artery-only finger replantations into account, one finger (0.8%) was nail distal third, 70 fingers (56%) were nail distal third to lunula, 43 fingers (34.4%) were lunula to distal phalanx basis, 10 fingers (8%) were distal interphalangeal (DIP) joint, and one finger (0.8%) was middle phalanx. Operative revision was performed on 60 (14.9%) fingers. The need for operative revision was arterial insufficiency in 37 fingers (61.7%) and venous insufficiency in 23 fingers (38.3%). The average revision time was 43 (range=6–144) hours. While the average elapsed time for artery procedures was 35.3 (range=8–110) hours, the average elapsed time for vein procedures was 47.1 (range=6–144) hours. Finger survival rates were examined. Injury mechanism, amputation level, the number of artery/vein repairs and methods were examined in all patients and revision patients separately.ResultsAfter the replantations, according to survival analysis, while 342 (84.9%) fingers were operated upon successfully, 61 (15.1%) fingers developed necrosis. In the patients with revision surgery, the survival rate was 78.3%. The need for revision was arterial insufficiency in 37 fingers (61.7%) and venous insufficiency in 23 fingers (38.3%). The revision rate was significantly lower than other injury types in clean-cut cases. In terms of levels of injury, no revisions were required from distal to lunula level, and the highest revision rate was observed at the proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint level.ConclusionThe results of the present study have shown that early re-exploration can provide a 78.3% success rate and can increase the survival rate from 67.6% to 84.2% following replantation of single digital amputations. Surgical re-exploration seems to be a reasonable salvage for replanted fingers with vascular insufficiency.Level of EvidenceLevel IV, Therapeutic study     

Transient bone resorption following finger replantation: a report of 3 cases

Radiographic changes consisting of alterations in mineral content, osteopaenia or destructive neuropathy that occur following successful finger replantation have already been described. We report our experience about four fingers in three individuals in whom bone changes developed in the first three months postoperatively with complete "restitution ad integrum".Three patients, 21-49 years old (average 36 years) sustained a clean-cut amputation of four fingers. The first patient had an amputation at the base of the middle phalanx of the index finger and the second patient at the base of the proximal phalanx of the ring finger. The third had an amputation at the base of the first metacarpal bone and the proximal phalanx of the small finger in a five finger amputation. In the first case, two dorsal veins and two palmar digital arteries and nerves were repaired. In the second case, one palmar artery and one dorsal vein were reanastomosed. In the third case at the thumb, two dorsal veins and two palmar digital arteries and nerves were reconstructed. At the small finger, one dorsal vein, one palmar digital artery and two digital nerves were reconstructed. Bone fixation was achieved with two and three K-wires or tension-band wiring. Replantation was successful in all cases. Three weeks after replantation, the X-rays showed rapid development of osteopaenia in the juxtaartieular region and metaphyses of the bone. These changes were followed by subperiosteal,intracortical and endosteal bone resorption. No further surgical procedures or splintage were needed and hand therapy was not discontinued. At 10-13 weeks (average 12 weeks)postoperatively, the X-rays showed a complete recovery with new periosteal bone formation.We suggest that the radiographic changes after finger replantation are transient, first evident subperiosteally and progressing centrally. They may reflect small-vessel compromise and microinfarction and transient hyperemia secondary to neurovascular damage or to sympathetic progressive recovery.     

Transient bone resorption following finger replantation: a report of 3 cases

Radiographic changes consisting of alterations in mineral content, osteopaenia or destructive neuropathy that occur following successful finger replantation have already been described. We report our experience about four fingers in three individuals in whom bone changes developed in the first three months postoperatively with complete “restitution ad integrum”.Three patients, 21-49 years old (average 36 years) sustained a clean-cut amputation of four fingers. The first patient had an amputation at the base of the middle phalanx of the index finger and the second patient at the base of the proximal phalanx of the ring finger. The third had an amputation at the base of the first metacarpal bone and the proximal phalanx of the small finger in a five finger amputation. In the first case, two dorsal veins and two palmar digital arteries and nerves were repaired. In the second case, one palmar artery and one dorsal vein were reanastomosed. In the third case at the thumb, two dorsal veins and two palmar digital arteries and nerves were reconstructed. At the small finger, one dorsal vein, one palmar digital artery and two digital nerves were reconstructed. Bone fixation was achieved with two and three K-wires or tension-band wiring. Replantation was successful in all cases. Three weeks after replantation, the X-rays showed rapid development of osteopaenia in the juxtaarticular region and metaphyses of the bone. These changes were followed by subperiosteal, intracortical and endosteal bone resorption. No further surgical procedures or splintage were needed and hand therapy was not discontinued. At 10-13 weeks (average 12 weeks) postoperatively, the X-rays showed a complete recovery with new periosteal bone formation.We suggest that the radiographic changes after finger replantation are transient, first evident subperiosteally and progressing centrally. They may reflect small-vessel compromise and microinfarction and transient hyperemia secondary to neurovascular damage or to sympathetic progressive recovery.     

The results of replantation after amputation of a single finger

We reviewed fifty-nine consecutive cases of patients who had replantation of a single finger (excluding the thumb) after traumatic amputation, with an average follow-up of fifty-three months. Fifty-one (86 per cent) of the replanted fingers survived. Survival was found to be affected by the age of the patient, the number of vessels that were anastomosed, and the replantation experience of the surgeons. The survival rate was not affected by the gender of the patient, the mechanism of injury, or which finger was amputated. As compared with survival only, the functional results were most dependent on the level of amputation. The proximal interphalangeal joint in amputated fingers that were replanted distal to the insertion of the flexor superficialis tendon had an average range of motion of 82 degrees after replantation, while those amputated proximal to the insertion had an average range of motion of only 35 degrees after replantation. The average operating time was six hours and ten minutes, and the average time until the patient returned to work was 2.3 months. Based on this experience, it is our opinion that replantation of a single finger that was amputated distal to the insertion of the flexor superficialis tendon is justified, but that replantation of a single finger that was amputated proximal to this insertion is seldom indicated.