title: Evidence to support controversy in microsurgery.
abstract: Microsurgery practice, including preoperative patient selection, intraoperative technique, and anesthetic considerations, varies from institution to institution and from surgeon to surgeon. Many surgeons' practices are driven by "conventional wisdom," which is handed down from mentors to fellows and residents. In this article, the authors explore the oxymoron that there is evidence to support controversy in microsurgery. Indeed, if there was convincing evidence to support varying microsurgery practices, there would be no controversy. The authors conducted a review with a focus on evidence-based medicine to support microsurgery practice.
authors.affiliation: Washington, D.C.; Rochester, Minn.; and Philadelphia, Pa. From the Department of Plastic Surgery, Georgetown University Hospital; the Division of Plastic Surgery, Mayo Clinic; and the Department of Orthopedic Surgery, University of Pennsylvania.
authors.forename: Kenneth L
authors.initials: KL
authors.lastname: Fan
authors.forename: Ketan M
authors.initials: KM
authors.lastname: Patel
authors.forename: Samir
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Mardini
authors.forename: Christopher
authors.initials: C
authors.lastname: Attinger
authors.forename: L Scott
authors.initials: LS
authors.lastname: Levin
authors.forename: Karen K
authors.initials: KK
authors.lastname: Evans
mesh_terms: D019317:Evidence-Based Medicine; D006801:Humans; D008866:Microsurgery / Q000379:methods*; D018579:Patient Selection; D019651:Plastic Surgery Procedures / Q000379:methods*