Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2024; 40(04): 268-275
DOI: 10.1055/a-2153-4552
Original Article

Thermal Challenges in Dynamic Infrared Thermography Used for Perforator Mapping

Olivia M. Lin
1   Department of Surgery, Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
2   Department of Surgery, Monash University Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
,
David J. Hunter-Smith
1   Department of Surgery, Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
2   Department of Surgery, Monash University Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
,
Warren M. Rozen 
1   Department of Surgery, Peninsula Clinical School, Central Clinical School, Faculty of Medicine, Monash University, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
2   Department of Surgery, Monash University Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria, Australia
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background The aim of this study is to investigate the different approaches to thermal challenges, both cold and warm, used in dynamic infrared thermography for reconstructive surgery, and explore whether it affects the success of preoperative perforator mapping.

Methods Literature was collected from Ovid Medline, Embase, PubMed, and Cochrane. The references of the full-text articles located from the original search were also appraised. Thirteen articles were extracted for the final qualitative analysis. A systematic review was then conducted following the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines.

Results Thirteen articles looked at a cold challenge, which included airflow cooling, direct contact cooling, and evaporation-based cooling. Two articles investigated warm challenges. One paper used no challenge, suggesting it unnecessary with a highly sensitive camera. All cold challenges were positively supported by a high level of flap perfusion success and/or a high level of correlation with other forms of investigation.

Conclusion Cold challenges were overall superior to no challenge and warm challenges; however, this conclusion is limited by the small participant size, the possibility of detection bias, and poor methodology detailing. Airflow cooling—specifically, using a desktop fan to blow air for 2 minutes—was noted to likely cause the least discomfort due to a low cooling capacity yet simultaneously maintain effectiveness and allow for a uniform cooling application. Warm challenges showed less conclusive results and were restricted by lack of studies. This topic would benefit from larger scale studies that compare multiple approaches while using standardized equipment to eliminate confounding factors.

Keywords

dynamic infrared thermography - perforator mapping - surgery - thermal challenge


Publication History

Received: 18 May 2023

Accepted: 31 July 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
14 August 2023

Article published online:
26 September 2023

© 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Mercer J, Weerd L, Weum S. Thermography in plastic surgery. Thermol Int 2012; 22: 9-15
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Rozen WM, Garcia-Tutor E, Alonso-Burgos A. et al. Planning and optimising DIEP flaps with virtual surgery: the Navarra experience. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2010; 63 (02) 289-297
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Meola C, Carlomagno G. Recent advances in the use of infrared thermography. Meas Sci Technol 2004; 15 (09) R27-R58
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Verstockt J, Thiessen F, Cloostermans B, Tjalma W, Steenackers G. DIEP flap breast reconstructions: thermographic assistance as a possibility for perforator mapping and improvement of DIEP flap quality. Appl Opt 2020; 59 (17) E48-E56
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Theuvenet WJ, Koeyers GF, Borghouts MH. Thermographic assessment of perforating arteries. A preoperative screening method for fasciocutaneous and musculocutaneous flaps. Scand J Plast Reconstr Surg 1986; 20 (01) 25-29
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 de Weerd L, Weum S, Mercer JB. The value of dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT) in perforator selection and planning of free DIEP flaps. Ann Plast Surg 2009; 63 (03) 274-279
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Weum S, Mercer JB, de Weerd L. Evaluation of dynamic infrared thermography as an alternative to CT angiography for perforator mapping in breast reconstruction: a clinical study. BMC Med Imaging 2016; 16 (01) 43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Cifuentes IJ, Dagnino BL, Salisbury MC, Perez ME, Ortega C, Maldonado D. Augmented reality and dynamic infrared thermography for perforator mapping in the anterolateral thigh. Arch Plast Surg 2018; 45 (03) 284-288
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Illg C, Krauss S, Rothenberger J, Kolbenschlag J, Daigeler A, Schäfer RC. Air flow cooling improves anterolateral thigh perforator mapping using the flir one thermal camera. J Reconstr Microsurg 2022; 38 (02) 144-150
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Zetterman E, Salmi A, Suominen S, Karonen A, Asko-Seljavaara S. Effect of cooling and warming on thermographic imaging of the perforating vessels of the abdomen. Eur J Plast Surg 1999; 22 (2–3): 58-61
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Kolacz S, Moderhak M, Jankau J. Comparison of perforator location in dynamic and static thermographic imaging with Doppler ultrasound in breast reconstruction surgery. Paper presented at: 13th Quantitative Infrared Thermography Conference (QIRT), Gdansk, Poland - 4 July 2016. 2016: 407-410
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Tenorio X, Mahajan AL, Elias B. et al. Locating perforator vessels by dynamic infrared imaging and flow Doppler with no thermal cold challenge. Ann Plast Surg 2011; 67 (02) 143-146
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 de Weerd L, Weum S, Mercer JB. Locating perforator vessels by dynamic infrared imaging and flow Doppler with no thermal cold challenge. Ann Plast Surg 2014; 72 (02) 261-261
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Itoh Y, Arai K. Use of recovery-enhanced thermography to localize cutaneous perforators. Ann Plast Surg 1995; 34 (05) 507-511
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Taylor GI, Doyle M, McCarten G. The Doppler probe for planning flaps: anatomical study and clinical applications. Br J Plast Surg 1990; 43 (01) 1-16
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Giunta RE, Geisweid A, Feller AM. The value of preoperative Doppler sonography for planning free perforator flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105 (07) 2381-2386
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Whitaker IS, Lie KH, Rozen WM, Chubb D, Ashton MW. Dynamic infrared thermography for the preoperative planning of microsurgical breast reconstruction: a comparison with CTA. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012; 65 (01) 130-132
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Muntean MV, Strilciuc S, Ardelean F. et al. Using dynamic infrared thermography to optimize color Doppler ultrasound mapping of cutaneous perforators. Med Ultrason 2015; 17 (04) 503-508
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Illg C, Krauss S, Rachunek K, Thiel JT, Daigeler A, Schäfer RC. Thermography supported color duplex ultrasound accelerates alt perforator imaging. J Reconstr Microsurg 2023; 39 (04) 295-300
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Muntean MV, Strilciuc S, Ardelean F, Georgescu AV. Dynamic infrared mapping of cutaneous perforators. J Xiangya Med 2018; 3 (04) DOI: 10.21037/jxym.2018.04.05.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Renkielska A, Nowakowski A, Kaczmarek M, Ruminski J. Burn depths evaluation based on active dynamic IR thermal imaging–a preliminary study. Burns 2006; 32 (07) 867-875
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 FLIR Systems. Thermacam® s65hsv infrared camera. 2005 http://www.hoskinscientifique.com/uploadpdf/Instrumentation/FLIR%20Systems/hoskin_S65HSV_478b88383b292.pdf Accessed July 28, 2023
    PubMed
  • 23 Hallock GG. Dynamic infrared thermography and smartphone thermal imaging as an adjunct for preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative perforator free flap monitoring. Plast Aesthet Res 2019; 6: 29
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Hallock GG. The use of smartphone thermography to more safely unmask and preserve circulation to keystone advancement flaps in the lower extremity. Injury 2020; 51 (Suppl. 04) S121-S125
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Grochalski K, Wieczorowski M, Pawlus P, H'Roura J. Thermal Sources of Errors in Surface Texture Imaging. Materials (Basel) 2020; ;19: 13 (10) 2337 DOI: 10.3390/ma13102337.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 TELEDYNE FLIR LLC. Pro-grade thermal camera for smartphones flir one pro. 2021 https://www.flir.com.au/products/flir-one-pro/?vertical=condition+monitoring&segment=solutions Accessed July 28, 2023
    PubMed
  • 27 Thiessen FEF, Tondu T, Vermeersch N. et al. Dynamic infrared thermography (DIRT) in deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction: standardization of the measurement set-up. Gland Surg 2019; 8 (06) 799-805
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Chijiwa T, Arai K, Miyazaki N, Igota S, Yamamoto N. Making of a facial perforator map by thermography. Ann Plast Surg 2000; 44 (06) 596-600
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar