Is it possible to do a microvascular anastomosis with an ordinary video camera? Experimental study

An alternative method of magnification for microvascular anastomosis was analyzed using an ordinary video camera and compared with the traditional method under microscope. For this study 20 rats were divided in two groups of 10 each: control group (microscope-assisted [M]) and experimental group (video-assisted [V]). Magnification was accomplished by a surgical microscope in group M, whereas a video system composed of low-cost camera, audiovisual cable, and analogue television in group V. In both groups, the right femoral artery was severed and sutured with interrupted simple stitches. The criteria examined were: patency, vessel diameter, amount of sutures, anastomosis time, and histologic features. There were no differences between both groups in patency rate and vessel diameter. The video-assisted microanastomosis is a time-consuming procedure as compared with the microscope-assisted anastomosis, to a certain extent due to lack of stereoscopic image and technical inability with the video system as well. There was a smaller quantity of sutures in group V. Higher foreign body tissue reaction was found in group M, consequent to greater amount of suture material. In conclusion, video-assisted microanastomosis is possible with the present video system but is not as safe as conventional microanastomosis.