RESUMO
Background: Iatrogenic vascular injuries (IVIs) due to diagnostic and therapeutic interventions are known but rare or probably under-reported. We present our four-year findings on patients with IVIs after catheterization or surgery who underwent vascular surgical repairs in a resource-limited setting. Methods: A retrospective case series study between Jun 2018 and Sep 2022 of 35 patients diagnosed with IVIs and treated surgically at our hospital was included. The data on IVIs including patient characteristics, causes and type of injury, treatment, and outcomes were collected and analyzed. Results: The mean age was 37.12± 17.0 years, and most patients (65.7%) were male. Of the 35 IVIs, 21 were caused by percutaneous procedures, while 14 occurred intraoperatively and affected various arteries and veins. The main injured vessels were the femoral artery (20%) and direct blood vessel puncture made by non-qualified specialists (42.9%) during dialysis cannulation was the main cause. The intraoperative IVI affected the inferior vena cava in three patients, the aorta in two patients, the external iliac artery in four, the tibial and popliteal arteries in four, and the internal carotid artery in one. The following types of repairs were recorded: direct suture of the vessel with or without endarterectomy (71.4%), synthetic patch placement (25.7%), ligation (8.6%), bypass or interposition graft (14.3%), and thromboembolectomy (5.7%). Vascular repair was successful in 32 (91.4%) patients while three patients (8.6%) were expired. Complications occurred in 7 (20%) patients, of which superficial wound infections were the common complication (11.6%) and were treated with proper antibiotic therapy. Conclusion: Prompt identification of IVIs, as well as proper triage for future treatment, can enhance patient outcomes. Our data showed that non-qualified specialists seem to be responsible for the majority of IVIs. For that, we emphasize the importance of performing vascular procedures by a qualified specialist with adequate training.
RESUMO
Background: This article aims to share our experiences with microsurgical finger replantation in a resource-limited setting. Methods: This multi-institutional, retrospective study included 21 cases of finger amputation that underwent microsurgical replantation, within 7 years period. Patient demographics, preoperative assessments, surgical approaches, and outcomes were documented and analyzed. A univariate analysis was performed to obtain factors associated with digit reimplantation failure. Results: Out of 21 cases included, 8 (38.1%) had complete amputations and 13 (61.9%) had incomplete amputations. Crush injuries accounted for the majority (71.4%). On average, 2.2 ± 1.1 digits were affected, with the ring finger being the most commonly injured (71.4%). The mean operative time was 121.5 ± 26.8 minutes. The success rate of digit replantation was 76.2%. During a mean follow-up of 14.3 ± 3.7 months, 85.7% of successfully replanted digits considered their replantation results satisfactory. The majority of replanted digits demonstrated active and effective holding and grasping abilities without pain or instability (76.2%). Replantation failure was associated with a higher number of affected digits (p < 0.001), longer operative time (p = 0.004), complete avulsion (p = 0.003), current smoking (p = 0.025), diabetes (p = 0.006), hypertension (p = 0.047), procedure difficulty score (p= 0.004), and occurrence of complications (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Microsurgical finger replantation can yield favorable outcomes and acceptable survival rates, even within resource-limited settings. However, this procedure requires specialized equipment and personnel that may not be available at all institutions. Influential factors in digit replantation failure, include an increased number of damaged digits, extended operative duration, complete avulsion, current smoking, diabetes, hypertension, procedure difficulty score, and postoperative complications occurrence.
