| Literature DB >> 31942290 |
Pavlo O Badiul1,2, Sergii V Sliesarenko2,3, Mykola G Saliaiev2, Lilia V Kriachkova4.
Abstract
In practice worldwide, there are experiences affecting different body functions via central control mechanisms with the help of psychotherapy methods. In plastic and reconstructive surgery, there is the experience of applying hypnosis, with the main goal of eliminating pain. The aim of this research is to study the impact of hypnosis on the perfusion level in perforator flaps in the early postoperative period, which could enhance flap survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: For studying the impact of hypnosis on blood circulation in perforator flaps, the analysis of a 18 cases has been conducted. All patients had hypnosis sessions on the second day after the reconstruction, and some had additional sessions on the third and fifth days. In the state of trance, the patient was given specially organized instructions aimed at improvement of perforator flap perfusion. Monitoring of microcirculation in the flap during hypnosis sessions was carried out using a Moor VMS-LDF1 Laser Doppler Perfusion and Temperature Monitor.Entities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31942290 PMCID: PMC6908369 DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002491
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open ISSN: 2169-7574
Patient Demographic Data
| Data | n (%) |
|---|---|
| Sex: male | 15 (83) |
| Female | 3 (17) |
| Flap: propeller | 8 (44) |
| Pedicle | 7 (39) |
| Keystone | 3 (17) |
| Localization: foot | 6 (33) |
| Hand | 1 (5.5) |
| Groin | 1 (5.5) |
| Thigh | 3 (17) |
| Forearm | 2 (11) |
| Lower leg | 2 (11) |
| Trunk | 3 (17) |
| Etiology: burn | 1 (5.5) |
| Electric burn | 3 (17) |
| Oncology | 1 (5.5) |
| Scars | 4 (22) |
| Traumatic wound | 7 (39) |
| Trophic wound | 2 (11) |
Characteristics of Cases
| Patient | Age | Sex | Flap | Localization | Etiology | Sessions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 33 | M | ALT pedicle flap | Trunk | Burn | 1 |
| 2 | 26 | M | DPAU flap | Hand | Electric burn | 1 |
| 3 | 61 | M | Propeller | Foot | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 4 | 23 | M | MSAP flap | Foot | Traumatic wound | 3 |
| 5 | 60 | F | MSAP flap | Foot | Trophic wound | 2 |
| 6 | 65 | M | ALT pedicle flap | Groin | Scars | 1 |
| 7 | 40 | M | PFAP-3 flap | Thigh | Scars | 2 |
| 8 | 57 | M | ARP flap | Hand | Scars | 1 |
| 9 | 50 | M | Keystone | Thigh | Electric burn | 2 |
| 10 | 47 | F | Propeller | Forearm | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 11 | 26 | M | MSAP flap | Foot | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 12 | 26 | M | Propeller | Lower leg | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 13 | 39 | M | Propeller | Lower leg | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 14 | 35 | M | LAP flap | Trunk | Oncology | 1 |
| 15 | 20 | M | SAIP | Trunk | Scars | 1 |
| 16 | 44 | F | Keystone | Foot | Traumatic wound | 1 |
| 17 | 41 | M | MSAP flap | Foot | Trophic wound | 1 |
| 18 | 35 | M | Keystone | Thigh | Electric burn | 1 |
ALT, anterolateral thigh; ARP, artery radialis perforator; DPAU, distal perforator artery ulnar; F, female; LAP, lumbar artery perforator; M, male; MSAP, medial sural artery perforator; PFAP-3, third perforator of the profunda femoris artery flap; SAIP, supraclavicular artery island flap.
Results of Flap Perfusion Measurement before, during, and after Hypnosis
| Parameter | 1 Measurement | 2 Measurement | 3 Measurement | 4 Measurement | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Perfusion (PU), mean (SD) | 22.7 (12.9) | 24.1 (13.2) | 25.7 (14.9) | 25.7 (15.1) | 0.004 | 0.025 | 0.019 |
| Temperature (°C), mean (SD) | 29.9 (2.2) | 31.1 (2.0) | 31.8 (2.1) | 32.0 (2.2) | <0.001 | <0.001 | <0.001 |
| Blood cell concentration (AU), median (25%; 75%) | 74.4 (56.8; 101.1) | 71.9 (55.9; 105.6) | 73.9 (57.1; 113.0) | 77.5 (55.1; 111.7) | 0.446* | 0.420* | 0.523* |
| Level of confidence, mean (SD) | 66.4 (23.4) | 65.8 (20.6) | 65.6 (19.4) | 60.9 (24.3) | 0.696 | 0.739 | 0.377 |
P values were determined by the dependent samples t test.
*P values were determined by the Wilcoxon matched pairs test.
AU, arbitrary unit; PU, perfusion unit.
Fig. 1.Flap monitoring. Changes of perfusion in the flap in different stages of hypnosis. 1: before the hypnosis session; 2: trance formation and deepening; 3: in a deep trance and at the time of intense hypnosis instructions aimed at increasing perfusion; and 4: after the hypnosis session.
Fig. 2.Average flap perfusion (A) and surface temperature (B) under hypnosis within 4 dynamic measurements. PU, perfusion unit.
Changes in Flap Perfusion and Surface Temperature under Hypnosis between First Measurement before the Hypnosis Session and the following Measurements in Dynamics (during and after Hypnosis Session)
| Changes in Parameters | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | CI | CI | Coef. Var., % |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Flap perfusion changes (PU) | ||||||
| 2 measurement – 1 measurement | −1.9 | 4.0 | 1.4 | 0.5 | 2.3 | 128.9 |
| 3 measurement – 1 measurement | −4.0 | 13.5 | 3.0 | 0.4 | 5.5 | 172.5 |
| 4 measurement – 1 measurement | −4.0 | 16.2 | 3.0 | 0.6 | 5.5 | 163.2 |
| Flap surface temperature changes (°C) | ||||||
| 2 measurement – 1 measurement | 0.0 | 2.5 | 1.2 | 0.8 | 1.7 | 74.4 |
| 3 measurement – 1 measurement | 0.0 | 4.6 | 1.9 | 1.3 | 2.5 | 68.4 |
| 4 measurement – 1 measurement | 0.2 | 5.6 | 2.1 | 1.4 | 2.9 | 69.3 |
Coef. Var., coefficient of variation; PU, perfusion unit.