ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Preoperative imaging by Computed Tomographic Angiography (CTA) has been promoted a gold standard tool for perforator mapping in abdominally based microsurgical breast reconstruction, while Color Doppler Ultrasound (CDU) has lost its popularity. As the CTA X-ray exposure might have long-term consequences for patients, CDU has regained importance for preoperative workup in our center. Our aim was to revisit the role of CDU by comparing the reliability of CDU and CTA in predicting intraoperative perforator selection. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review study of patients who underwent microsurgical breast reconstructions with DIEP flaps at our institution. Both CTA and CDU were performed prior to the surgery, and both imaging entities were thoroughly examined by the surgical team. Perforator identification, number, size, and location were assessed and correlated with CTA and CDU data and with intraoperative findings. RESULTS: We identified 98 patients who received 125 DIEP flap surgeries. A significantly stronger correlation was found between CDU and intraoperative findings of perforator detection and size (p<0.0001) and selection (râ¯=â¯0.9987, CI 0.9981-0.9991, p < 0.0001 and râ¯=â¯0.01, CI -0.18-0.2, pâ¯=â¯0.91, respectively), when compared with CTA data. If none of the preoperative imaging studies matched intraoperative perforator selection, an association with a higher incidence of flap loss (Odds ratio 4.483, CI 0.5068-39.65, pâ¯=â¯0.2171) was found. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggests that CDU might regain relevance as a safe and reliable preoperative imaging study, without the risk and potential consequences of X-ray exposure. Preoperative imaging tools like CDU and CTA should be considered part of the gold standard in abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction.
Subject(s)
Computed Tomography Angiography/methods , Epigastric Arteries/diagnostic imaging , Mammaplasty/methods , Perforator Flap/transplantation , Ultrasonography, Interventional/methods , Abdominal Muscles/blood supply , Abdominal Muscles/surgery , Adult , Autografts , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cohort Studies , Epigastric Arteries/transplantation , Female , Graft Survival , Humans , Intraoperative Care/methods , Mastectomy/methods , Microsurgery/methods , Middle Aged , Perforator Flap/blood supply , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Switzerland , Treatment Outcome , Ultrasonography, Doppler, Color/methodsABSTRACT
Patients with non-rheumatic atrial fibrillation (AF) have an increased risk for ischemic stroke. The presence of risk factors such as a history of ischemic stroke, transient ischemic attack, diabetes mellitus, arterial hypertension or advanced age allows the classification of patients with AF in three groups with high, moderate, and low stroke risk. High-risk patients should receive oral anticoagulants, low-risk patients aspirin, and moderate-risk patients one of both antithrombotic agents. However, primary stroke prevention studies suggest that many high-risk patients are not anticoagulated, whereas low risk patients receive anticoagulants instead of aspirin. Our retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data examined the antithrombotic therapy of patients with first-ever stroke and known non-valvular AF and compared the results with the recommendations of the Atrial Fibrillation Investigators (AFI) and the Stroke Prevention in Atrial Fibrillation (SPAF) study. Contraindications against anticoagulation were taken into consideration. High-risk patients received in 36% an appropriate antithrombotic therapy according to the AFI-guidelines, and in 28% according to the SPAF-guidelines. About one quarter of low-risk patients were anticoagulated unnecessarily. Our study confirms that many patients with AF and high stroke risk do not get the appropriate antithrombotic therapy, while some patients with low-risk are anticoagulated without cause.
