Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2003; 19(8): 567-570
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-815644
Copyright © 2003 by Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc., 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA. Tel.: +1(212) 584-4662

The “Sun Window” - A Simple and Effective Alternative to the Use of Background Contrast Material During Microvascular Anastomosis

Tzong-Bor Sun1 , Lee-Ping Hsu2 , Peir-Rong Chen2
  • 1Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital and School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
  • 2Department of Otolaryngology, Buddhist Tzu Chi General Hospital and School of Medicine, Tzu Chi University, Hualien, Taiwan
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
14 January 2004 (online)

Also available at
    Permissions and Reprints

ABSTRACT

A new and simple alternative method, the “Sun window,” is introduced for creating a comfortable environment while doing microvascular anastomoses. A prospective randomized study, analyzing the anastomosis time for 34 free radial forearm flaps, was conducted to validate the effectiveness of this method. The time required for doing anastomoses with and without a “Sun window” are 8.74 ± 1.46 and 10.36 ± 1.20, respectively, p < 0.01. The results demonstrated that the “Sun window” is an effective method for promoting the patency rate and accuracy of microvascular anastomosis.

KEYWORDS

Sun window - background - microvascular anastomosis

REFERENCES

  • 1 Jones T R, Jones N F. Advance in reconstruction of the upper aerodigestive tract and cranial base with free tissue transfer.  Clin Plast Surg . 1992;  19 819-831
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Neligan P C, Mulholland S, Irish J. et al . Flap selection in cranial base reconstruction.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1996;  98 1159-1196
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 3 Sun T B, Lee T T, Chien S H. Surgical reconstruction for buccal cancer in eastern Taiwan.  Tzu Chi Med J . 1999;  11 131-138
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Talesnik A, Markowitz B, Calcaterra T. et al . Cost and outcome of osteocutaneous free-tissue transfer versus pedicled soft-tissue reconstruction for composite mandibular defects.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1996;  97 1167-1178
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Stern J R, Keller A J, Wenig B L. Evaluation of reconstructive techniques of oropharyngeal defects.  Ann Plast Surg . 1989;  22 332-336
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 O'Brien B M, Henderson P N, Bennett R C. et al . Microvascular surgical technique.  Med J Austr . 1970;  1 722-725
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 O'Brien B M, Morrison W A, Gumley G J. Principles and techniques of microvascular surgery. In: McCarthy JG, ed. Plastic Surgery Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Company, 1990: 412-473
    Search in Google Scholar
  • 8 Isogai N, Kamiishi H. Usefulness of the silicone microsurgical background.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1989;  84 366-367
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Terzis J, Faibisoff B, Williams H B. Use of polyethylene bag background in microsurgical repair of peripheral nerves.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1974;  53 596-597
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Rasheed T, Gordon D. Plastic innovations: background material for microvascular anastomosis.  Br J Plast Surg . 1999;  52 159
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Mulholland S, Boyd J B, McCabe S. et al . Recipient vessels in head and neck microsurgery: radiation effect and vessel access.  Plast Reconstr Surg . 1993;  92 628-632
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar