Mythbusters in Microsurgery: Evaluating Evidence and Debunking Dogma-A Practical Review: Part I

Abdulaziz Elemosho1, Hamid Malekzadeh1, Jude C Kluemper1

  • 1From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University Wexner Medical Center, Columbus, OH.

Abstract

Insights

Many reconstructive microsurgery practices lack evidence. This review debunks myths, showing updated protocols like avoiding routine anticoagulation and limiting steroid use improve patient outcomes and reduce complications.

Area of Science:

  • Microsurgery
  • Evidence-based medicine
  • Surgical outcomes

Background:

  • Reconstructive microsurgery is vital for complex defects.
  • Many perioperative practices lack robust evidence.
  • Complications and variable protocols necessitate re-evaluation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • Critically appraise common perioperative myths in reconstructive microsurgery.
  • Identify evidence-based practices to improve patient outcomes.
  • Guide best practices in microsurgical care.

Main Methods:

  • Comprehensive literature review of major databases.
  • Studies assessed and graded using the GRADE system.
  • Prioritized meta-analyses and systematic reviews.

Main Results:

  • Intraoperative vasopressor use is safe.
  • NSAIDs do not increase hematoma or thrombosis risk.
  • Routine anticoagulation/dextran offers no benefit and increases bleeding.
  • High-dose steroids increase complications.
  • Extended antibiotics beyond 24 hours do not reduce infections.
  • Negative-pressure wound therapy is safe for free flaps.
  • Vascular compromises typically occur within 48-72 hours.
  • Advanced age and comorbidities do not preclude reconstruction.

Conclusions:

  • Many perioperative microsurgery practices lack current evidence.
  • Adopting updated, evidence-based protocols minimizes complications.
  • Standardizing care improves reconstructive microsurgery outcomes.