ArticlePlastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open2026
The Role of Flow Couplers in Free Flap Monitoring: Evidence From a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
Article in Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Flow couplers (FCs) are increasingly used in microsurgical free tissue transfer to provide continuous, real-time monitoring of venous outflow at the anastomotic site. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluates the clinical performance of FCs, focusing on diagnostic accuracy and flap outcomes compared with conventional monitoring techniques. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library was conducted through November 1, 2025, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Clinical studies reporting FC use in free flap reconstruction were included. Data on flap survival, venous thrombosis, complications, and FC diagnostic performance were extracted. Meta-analyses were performed to calculate pooled sensitivity, specificity, and flap failure rates. Results: Eleven studies including 1775 free flaps (876 monitored with FCs) met inclusion criteria. Pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting flap compromise were 96.5% and 90.9%, respectively. Flap failure occurred in 2.2% of FC-monitored flaps versus 3.1% in controls. FCs showed a high negative predictive value but variable positive predictive value, with false-positive signal losses being frequently caused by technical issues rather than true thrombosis. False negatives were uncommon. Compared with traditional monitoring methods, FCs provided superior continuous venous assessment. Conclusions: FCs are highly sensitive tools for early detection of venous compromise in free flap surgery, particularly in buried reconstructions. However, limited specificity and inability to detect arterial insufficiency support the use of multimodal monitoring strategies. Standardized protocols and technical expertise are essential to minimize false positives and optimize flap monitoring outcomes.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.