J Reconstr Microsurg 2011; 27(8): 503-508
DOI: 10.1055/s-0031-1284237
© Thieme Medical Publishers

Is it Possible to Do a Microvascular Anastomosis with an Ordinary Video Camera? Experimental Study

Rui S.M. Barros1 , Marcus V. Brito2 , Giovanna P. Moura1 , Marina P. Moura1 , Lívia M. Freitas1 , Karoline S. Silva1 , Rafael Aquino Leal1
  • 1Department of Orthopedic Surgery, State University of Para Belem, Para, Brazil
  • 2Department of General Surgery, State University of Para Belem, Para, Brazil
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 July 2011 (online)

ABSTRACT

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.

REFERENCES

  • 1 Medot M, Nelissen X, Heymans O, Adant J P, Fissette J. Video-microsurgery: a new tool in microsurgery.  Br J Plast Surg. 1999;  52 (2) 92-96
  • 2 Franken R J, Gupta S C, Banis Jr J C et al.. Microsurgery without a microscope: laboratory evaluation of a three dimensional on-screen microsurgery system.  Microsurgery. 1995;  16 (11) 746-751
  • 3 Jain A K, Sasaki S, Engels B, Oldenbeuving N B, Poindexter B D, Vasconez L O. Microvascular surgery utilizing the endoscope as the sole source of visual assistance.  Microsurgery. 1998;  18 (2) 86-89
  • 4 Gorman P J, Mackay D R, Kutz R H, Banducci D R, Haluck R S. Video microsurgery: evaluation of standard laparoscopic equipment for the practice of microsurgery.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;  108 (4) 864-869
  • 5 Southern S J, Ramakrishnan V, Villofane O, Watt D A, Sharpe D T. Video microsurgery: early experience with an alternative operating magnification system.  Microsurgery. 2001;  21 (2) 63-69
  • 6 El-Shazly M M, El-Sonbaty M A, Kamel A H, Zaki M S, Baumeister R G. Microvascular anastomosis in an optical cavity: is it possible?.  Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;  113 (1) 294-298
  • 7 Brito M VH, Brito N MB, Almeida A JB, Santos M RLC. Vaporizador artesanal de éter para cirurgia experimental em pequenos roedores.  Acta Cir Bras. 1998;  13 (1) 3-5
  • 8 Brito M VH, Rocha R P, Silva V A, Epaminondas W A. Propriedades da anestesia inalatória com éter sulfúrico em ratos.  Rev Para Med. 1999;  13 (2) 29-35
  • 9 Barros R SM. Princípios gerais da microcirurgia vascular. In: Pardini Jr A G, Freitas A D, eds. Traumatismos da Mão. 4th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Medbook; 2008: 643-674
  • 10 Ayres M, Ayres Jr M, Ayres D L, Santos A AS. BioEstat 5.0: Aplicações Estatísticas nas Áreas das Ciências Biológicas e Médicas. Belém: Sociedade Civil Mamirauá; 2005: 364

Rui S.M. BarrosM.D. M.S. Ph.D. 

Former Kleinert and Kutz Hand Fellow, Assistant Professor in Orthopedic Surgery, State University of Pará (UEPA)

Rua São Miguel 615, casa 16, Belém, PA, Brazil 66033-015

Email: ruismbarros@gmail.com

Email: rmbarros@amazon.com.br

    >