6 research outputs found

    The safety of one-per-mil tumescent infiltration into tissue that has survived ischemia

    Get PDF
    Background The aim of this study was to assess the safety of one-per-mil tumescent injections into viable skin flaps that had survived an ischemic insult, in order to assess the potential suitability of one-per-mil tumescent injections in future secondary reconstructive procedures such as flap revision and refinements after replantation. Methods Forty groin flaps harvested from 20 healthy Wistar rats weighing 220 to 270 g were subjected to acute ischemia by clamping the pedicle for 15 minutes. All flaps showing total survival on the 7th postoperative day were randomly divided into group A (one-per-mil tumescent infiltration; n=14), group B (normal saline infiltration; n=13), and group C (control, with no infiltration; n=13) before being re-elevated. Transcutaneous oxygen tension (TcPO2) was measured before and after infiltration, and changes in TcPO2 were statistically analyzed using analysis of variance, the paired t-test, and the independent t-test. The viability of flaps was also assessed using the Analyzing Digital Images software at 7 days after the second elevation. Results Thirty-nine flaps survived to the final assessment, with the sole exception of a flap from group A that did not survive the first elevation. TcPO2 readings showed significant decreases (P<0.05) following both one-per-mil tumescent (99.9±5.7 mmHg vs. 37.2±6.3 mmHg) and normal saline (103±8.5 mmHg vs. 48.7±5.9 mmHg) infiltration. Moreover, all groin flaps survived with no signs of tissue necrosis. Conclusions One-per-mil tumescent infiltration into groin flap tissue that had survived ischemia did not result in tissue necrosis, although the flaps experienced a significant decrease of cutaneous oxygenation

    A multi-centre randomised controlled trial comparing radiofrequency and mechanical occlusion chemically assisted ablation of varicose veins - final results of the Venefit versus Clarivein for varicose veins trial

    Get PDF
    BACKGROUND: Endovenous thermal ablation has revolutionised varicose vein treatment. New non-thermal techniques such as mechanical occlusion chemically assisted endovenous ablation (MOCA) allow treatment of entire trunks with single anaesthetic injections. Previous non-randomised work has shown reduced pain post-operatively with MOCA. This study presents a multi-centre randomised controlled trial assessing the difference in pain during truncal ablation using MOCA and radiofrequency endovenous ablation (RFA) with six months' follow-up. METHODS: Patients undergoing local anaesthetic endovenous ablation for primary varicose veins were randomised to either MOCA or RFA. Pain scores using Visual Analogue Scale and number scale (0-10) during truncal ablation were recorded. Adjunctive procedures were completed subsequently. Pain after phlebectomy was not assessed. Patients were reviewed at one and six months with clinical scores, quality of life scores and duplex ultrasound assessment of the treated leg. RESULTS: A total of 170 patients were recruited over a 21-month period from 240 screened. Patients in the MOCA group experienced significantly less maximum pain during the procedure by Visual Analogue Scale (MOCA median 15 mm (interquartile range 7-36 mm) versus RFA 34 mm (interquartile range 16-53 mm), p = 0.003) and number scale (MOCA median 3 (interquartile range 1-5) versus RFA 4 mm (interquartile range 3-6.5), p = 0.002). 'Average' pain scores were also significantly less in the MOCA group; 74% underwent simultaneous phlebectomy. Occlusion rates, clinical severity scores, disease specific and generic quality of life scores were similar between groups at one and six months. There were two deep vein thromboses, one in each group. CONCLUSION: Pain secondary to truncal ablation is less painful with MOCA than RFA with similar short-term technical, quality of life and safety outcomes

    Diagnosis of recurrent reflux within the remnant non-treatment stump after bilateral cyanoacrylate ablation of the great saphenous veins

    No full text
    Cyanoacrylate ablation, along with mechanochemical ablation, is one of the best-known non-thermal ablation treatment methods for superficial venous reflux. Cyanoacrylate ablation is comparable to thermal ablation in terms of efficacy and safety, and offers the benefit of not requiring tumescent injections and the use of compression stockings. Here, we report about a patient who developed recurrent reflux in the residual stump after cyanoacrylate ablation. As a refluxing long residual stump can be a risk factor for late recurrence, improvements are needed to make the protocol more refined, including leaving the stump as short as possible
    corecore