ABSTRACT
Local anesthesia is an effective method to perform digital nerve blocks. In this study, we compare the effectiveness of single-volar subcutaneous and double-dorsal injection through a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception to 7 April 2021 was performed. RCTs with the effects of single-volar subcutaneous and double-dorsal injection were eligible. Meta-analysis was performed using random effect models with pooled standardized mean differences (SMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). RoB 2.0 and GRADE of Recommendation Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria were applied for evaluating the bias. A total of 2484 studies were initially identified, with 11 eligible RCTs finally included in the meta-analysis (1363 patients). The pooled data of nine studies showed single-volar injection had a statistically significantly lower pain score (pooled SMD: 0.20, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.39, p = 0.041, I2 = 58%, N = 1187) and higher patient preference but invalid anesthesia at the dorsal proximal digit. No significant differences were observed in the onset of anesthesia, adjacent digit invalid numbness, distal phalanx invalid anesthesia, additional injection rate, and adverse effects. In conclusion, this meta-analysis of RCTs showed that the single-volar injection was associated with a lower pain sensation during injection and higher patient satisfaction with a reduced anesthetic effect over the proximal dorsal phalanx. Further high-quality RCTs with a higher number of cases are needed to validate our results.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Local , Anesthetics, Local , Humans , Injections, Subcutaneous , Fingers , PainABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Superficial temporal vessels have been used successfully as recipient vessels for head and neck reconstruction. This study evaluates the impact of several treatment variables on flap failure and take-back rate when using these recipient vessels. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective study of all microsurgical reconstructions using superficial temporal vessels as recipient vessels in a period of 10 years. Variables collected included previous treatments (radiotherapy, chemotherapy, neck dissection, free flap reconstruction), type of flaps used (soft tissue, osteocutaneous), and vessel size discrepancy between donor and recipient vessels. RESULTS: A total of 132 patients were included in the study. The flap success rate was 98.5%. The take-back rate was 10.6%. The most frequent reason for take-back was venous congestion secondary to thrombosis. None of the studied variables was associated with flap failure. Reconstructions using osteocutaneous flaps and vein diameter discrepancy (ratio ≥ 2:1) had significantly higher take-back rates. CONCLUSION: Flaps with a significant size discrepancy between donor and recipient veins (ratio ≥ 2:1) and fibula flaps (compared with soft tissue flaps) were associated with a higher risk of take-back. It is crucial to minimize venous engorgement during flap harvest and anastomosis, and limit vein redundancy during flap in-setting.
