4.3 Article

Monitoring free flaps and replanted digits via perfusion index - A proof of concept study

Journal

CLINICAL HEMORHEOLOGY AND MICROCIRCULATION
Volume 80, Issue 4, Pages 363-371

Publisher

IOS PRESS
DOI: 10.3233/CH-211295

Keywords

Perfusion index; monitoring; free flap; replanted digits

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the feasibility of using the perfusion index (PI) as a monitoring tool for free flaps and replanted digits. The results showed a significant intra- and interindividual range of PI and pulse oxygen saturation (SpO2). Trends in intraindividual PI changes may be a promising monitoring tool for free flaps and replanted digits.
BACKGROUND: Early detection and treatment of vascular complications in replanted digits is essential for the survival. The perfusion index (PI) represents a marker of peripheral perfusion as it shows the ratio of pulsatile to non-pulsatile blood flow. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the feasibility and applicability of the PI as a monitoring tool for free flaps and replanted digits by measuring the inter- and intraindividual changes in PI. METHODS: Five patients were postoperatively monitored according to intern standards by hourly clinical evaluation. Additionally, a pulse oximeter with SET-technology (R) (Masimo Radial 7, Masimo Corporation, Irvine, USA) was added with a LNCS (R) Red TFA-1 SpO2 sensor (Masimo Corporation, Irvine, USA) and respectively a LNCS (R) Neo-3 neonatal finger clip to evaluate the perfusion via PI and SpO2. RESULTS: All patients showed sufficient perfusion in clinical controls. There was no detectable vascular complication during follow-up. Mean perfusion index was 0.93 with a median of 0.44. The patients showed a mean SpO2 of 90.59% with a median of 89.21%. CONCLUSION: Our results show a great intra- and interindividual range of PI and SpO2. SpO2 provided an even greater range than PI. Trends in intraindividual PI changes may be a promising monitoring tool for free flaps and replanted digits.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available