Validation of Novel Microsurgical Vessel Anastomosis Techniques: A Systematic Review

Author:

Sadigh Yasmin1,Mechri Imen,Jain Anamika,Gautam Amata Thongphetsavong,Seh Hadil,Volovici VictorORCID

Affiliation:

1. Department of Neurosurgery, Erasmus MC Stroke Center, Erasmus MC University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Thorough validation of novel microsurgical techniques is deemed essential before their integration into clinical practice. To achieve proper validation, the design of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) should be undertaken, accompanied by the execution of comprehensive statistical analyses, including confounder adjustment and power analysis. This systematic review aims to provide an encompassing overview of the validation methodologies employed in microsurgical studies, with a specific focus on innovative vessel anastomosis techniques. Methods A literature search was conducted in PubMed for articles describing the validation of novel microsurgical vessel anastomosis techniques in animal or human subjects. Results The literature search yielded 6,658 articles. A total of 6,564 articles were excluded based on title and abstract. Ninety-four articles were assessed for full-text eligibility. Forty-eight articles were included in this systematic review. Out of 30 comparative studies, 9 studies validated novel modified interrupted suture techniques, 6 studies modified continuous techniques, 6 studies modified sleeve anastomosis techniques, 1 study a modified vesselotomy technique, 7 studies sutureless techniques, and 1 study a modified lymphaticovenular anastomosis technique. Twenty-eight studies contained animals (n = 1,998). Fifteen animal studies were RCTs. Two studies contained human/cadaveric subjects (n = 29). Statistical power analysis and confounder adjustment were performed in one animal study. Out of 18 noncomparative studies, 5 studies validated novel modified interrupted suture techniques, 1 study a modified continuous technique, 2 studies modified sleeve anastomosis techniques, 4 studies modified vesselotomy techniques, 4 studies sutureless techniques, and 2 studies modified lymphaticovenular anastomosis techniques. Ten studies contained animal subjects (n = 320), with two RCTs. Eight studies contained human subjects (n = 173). Statistical power analysis and confounder adjustment were performed in none of the animal or human studies. Conclusion The current methods of microsurgical technique validation should be reconsidered due to poor study design. Statistical analysis including confounder adjustment and power analysis should be performed as a standard method of novel technique validation.

Publisher

Georg Thieme Verlag KG

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3