Microvascular coupler device versus hand‐sewn venous anastomosis: A systematic review of the literature and data meta‐analysis

Background Successful vascular anastomosis is essential for the survival of free tissue transfer. The aim of the study is to review the current literature and perform a meta‐analysis to assess the potential advantages of a mechanical anastomosis coupler device (MACD) over the hand‐sewn (HS) technique for venous anastomoses. Methods A systematic Medline search was performed to gather all reports of articles related to MACD from 1984 until now. The following data were extracted: first author and publication date, study design, number of patients and anastomosis, coupler size, site and type of reconstruction, venous anastomotic time, flap failure. A meta‐analysis was performed on articles that met the following inclusion criteria: studies comparing MACD and HS technique in venous anastomosis, reporting anastomotic time, and postoperative complications. Results Thirty‐three studies were included for the analysis. Twenty‐four were retrospective case series and nine were retrospective comparative studies. A total of 12,304 patients were enrolled with a mean age of 49.23 years (range 31–72). A total of 13,669 flaps were accomplished. The thrombosis rate recorded with MACD was 1.47%. The meta‐analysis revealed that MACD significantly decreased anastomotic time (standard difference in means = −0.395 ± 0.105; Z = −3.776; p  < .001) and postoperative flap failure risk (odds ratio [OR] = 0.362, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.218–0.603, Z = −3.908, p  < .001), but it did not decrease postoperative venous thrombosis risk (OR = 0.504, 95% CI = 0.255–1.129, Z = −1.666, p = .096). Conclusions MACDs are a safe and effective alternative to traditional anastomosis. The anastomotic coupler is easier, much faster, and requires less technical skills than a HS microvascular anastomosis.