SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Damar Cerrahi Dergisi / 2001 / Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1

Our five years experience in peripherial vascular injuries

Periferik damar yaralanmalarında son 5 yıllık tecrübelerimiz

Melih Hulusi US
Osman RODOP
Kaan İNAN
Orhan ÇAKIR
Enver DURAN
Mutasım SÜNGÜN
Turan EGE
Ömer Yüksel ÖZTÜRK
Pages
36–40
Publication Date
2022-10-10
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

For the rest of the cases (36, 73.46%) physical examination was sufficient for surgical decision.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Forty-nine patients who were operated for vascular injury between January 1995 and January 2000 investigated retrospectively.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Twenty-nine patients (59.18%) were gun shot, 13 (26.53%) blunt trauma and 7( 14.28%) were injured by sharp tools.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:For the rest of the cases (36, 73.46%) physical examination was sufficient for surgical decision.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Forty-nine patients who were operated for vascular injury between January 1995 and January 2000 investigated retrospectively. Twenty-nine patients (59.18%) were gun shot, 13 (26.53%) blunt trauma and 7( 14.28%) were injured by sharp tools. Popliteal artery and popliteal vein was injured in 12 cases which were the most common injured vasculature (24.48%). In 21 cases bone injury (42.85%) and in 12 cases nerve injury ( 24.48%) was accompanying to vascular injury. Saphenous vein graft interpositioning was the most common repairment for both arterial and venous injury. For surgical decision making; in 9 cases (18.36%) angiography, in 4 cases ( 8.16%) Doppler ultrasonography was performed. For the rest of the cases (36, 73.46%) physical examination was sufficient for surgical decision.

Özet

Kliniğimizde Ocak 1995-Ocak 2000 tarihleri arasında, damar yaralanması nedeniyle müdahale edilen 49 olgu retrospektif olarak incelendi. Ateşli silahla yaralanma 29 (%59,18), künt travma 13 (%26,53), kesici aletle yaralanma 7 (%14,28) olguda etiyolojik faktör olarak tespit edildi. Popliteal arter+ven yaralanması 12 (%24,48) olgu ile en sık yaralanmanın olduğu damarlardı. Damar yaralanması ile birlikte, kemik yaralanması 21 (%42,85), sinir yaralanması 12 (%24,48) olguda tespit edildi. Arteriyel ve venöz tamirde safen ven grefti ile interpozisyon en sık uyguladığımız yöntemdi. Ameliyat endikasyonunu 9 (%18,36) olguda angiografi, 4 (%8,16) olguda doppler, 36 (%73,46) olguda fizik muayene sonuçlarıyla koyduk.

🔖

Cite This Article

US, M. H., RODOP, O., İNAN, K., ÇAKIR, O., DURAN, E., SÜNGÜN, M., EGE, T., ÖZTÜRK, Ö. Y. (2022). Our five years experience in peripherial vascular injuries. Damar Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 10 - Sayı: 1, 36–40. https://ajindex.com/articles/486904

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Belgerden S, Özgür M, Kayabalı M, Baktroğlu S, Kurtoğlu M. Damar yaralanmaları (102 olgunun analizi). Ulusal Cerrahi Dergisi 1985
  2. 294 2.Weaver FA, Hood DB, Yellin AE. Vascular Injuries of the Extremities. In:Rudherford RB(Ed). Vas­cular Surgery. Fifth Edition. Philadelphia. W.B.Saunders Company,2000:862-70. 3.Mattox KL, Hirschberg A. Vascular Trauma. In: Haimovici H(Ed). Haimovici's Vascular Surgery. Fourth Edition,USA,Blackwell Science, 1996:480-96. 4.Schickler WJ, Baker RJ. Types of vessel injuries and repairs. In: Falnigan DP (Ed). Civilian vascu­lar trauma. Philadelphia: Lea-Febiger, 1992:36-43. 5.Süngün M, Duran E, Peker F ve ark. Damar yaralanmalarında cerrahi yaklaşım. Ulusal Travma Dergisi 1997
  3. 3(4):303-307 6.Keçeligil HT, Arıkan A, Kolbakır F ve ark. Periferik vasküler yaralanmalar: 221 olgunun değerlen­dirilmesi. Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi 1995
  4. :27-33 7.Memiş Z, Kurt N, Gülman Y, Yücel T, Çevik A,Gülmen M. Damar Yaralanmaları. Damar Cerrahi­si Dergisi 1994
  5. 3(3):108-112. 8.Tünerir B, Beşoğul Y, Yavuz T, Al-Eqaidat, Aslan R, Kural T, Sevin B. Periferik Arteriyel yaralanma­lar ve tedavi sonuçları. Göğüs Kalp ve Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi 1998
  6. 6(2):151-154. 9.Ünlü Y, Vural Ü, Özyazıcıoğlu A, Ceviz M, Karapolat S, Koçak H. Üst ekstremite vasküler yara­lanmaları (98 olgunun değerlendirilmesi). Göğüs Kalp ve Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi 1998
  7. 6(4):318-322. 10.Taşdemir K, Oğuzkaya F, Kahraman C, Ceyran H, Emiroğulları ÖN, Yasım A. Üst ekstremite arter yaralanmaları (106 olgu nedeniyle). Göğüs Kalp Damar Cerrahisi Dergisi 1997
  8. 5(3):218-222. 11.Kuralay E, Özal E, Demirkılıç U, Cingöz F, Tatar H. Alt ekstremite vasküler yaralanmalarında geçi­ci intraluminal shuntların önemi. Damar Cerrahi­si Dergisi 1998
  9. 7(3): 116-120. 12.Morris JA, Eddy VA, et al. The staged celiotomy for trauma. Issues in unpacking and reconstructi­on. Ann Surg 1992
  10. Fryberg ER, Vines FS, Alexander RH: The natural history of clinically occult arterial injuries: A pros­pective evaluation. J Trauma 31:502, 1991. 14.Sullivan WA, Thorten FH, Baker LH. Early influ­ence of popliteal vein repair in treatment of pop­liteal vessel injuries. Ann Surg 1971
  11. Shah DM, Navaynsingh V, Leather RP, et al: Advences in the manegement of acute popliteal vas­cular blunt injuries. J Taruma 1985
  12. Timberlake GA, O'Connel RC, Kerstein MD. Ve­nous injuries: to repair or ligate, the dilemma. J Vasc Surg 1986
  13. Feliciano DV, Mattox KL, et al. Five year experi­ence with PTFE g