The value of loupe magnification: an underused tool in emergency medicine

Comparison of wound strength, histologic, and aesthetic outcomes after microsurgical versus conventional skin closure in a rat model

The purpose of this study was to compare the healing, strength, and cosmetic outcome of linear incisions after repair with the naked eye, surgical loupes, or a surgical microscope. Two parallel incisions were made on the dorsal skin of Sprague-Dawley rats (n = 36) and the rats randomized into four groups. A single surgeon repaired the incisions using 5-0 poliglecaprone in a running subcuticular pattern using the naked eye (Group I), surgical loupes with 2.5× magnification (Group II), surgical microscope with 5-10× magnification (Group III), and 6-0 poliglecaprone with a surgical microscope (Group IV). Rats were sacrificed at 1, 3, and 6 weeks. At each time point, the tensile strength of each closure was assessed. Macroscopic outcomes were evaluated using the Vancouver Scar Scale (VSS) and histology assessed by a blinded observer. Microscope closure took significantly longer than closure with the naked eye (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in tensile strength or VSS ratings between the closure methods at any of the time points. On histopathologic analysis, there were a greater number of inflammatory cells and fibroblasts in the 6-0 microscope closure group versus the naked eye closure group at week 3 (p ≤ 0.05). In conclusion, wound repair under magnification did not yield a significant difference in cosmesis or wound tensile strength, but did increase operative time. Moreover, there was a trend toward increased inflammation with microscope-assisted closures, perhaps due to the increased suture burden.

Surgical loupe usage among oculoplastic surgeons in North America

OBJECTIVE

To study the patterns of usage and perception among U.S. oculoplastic surgeons regarding surgical loupes.

METHODS

An anonymous 20-question survey was emailed out to the American Society of Ophthalmic Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery listserv. Data were compiled in Google Forms. SPSS was used for statistical analyses. This study was approved by the institutional review board.

RESULTS

Of the 609 members contacted, 239 (39%) completed the survey; 95% of respondents owned loupes and 78% regularly used them. No association was observed between frequency of loupe usage and sex or years in practice. The most common magnification and brand were 2.5× and Designs for Vision, respectively. The most common problems associated with loupes were limited vision (33%) and lack of comfort (24%), with 11% citing neck and cervical spinal disorders. The most common benefits were magnification (93%) and increased visual accuracy (68%). Of the respondents, 56% believed improved patient care to be a benefit and 76% believed that loupes enhance surgical outcome. With regard to training, 67% supported incorporating loupes into residency, 35% believed in mandating loupe purchase, and 25% wanted residencies to provide loupes at no cost. Respondent support for the use of loupes in practice and training was directly correlated with how frequently they used loupes.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of respondents owned loupes. Although most loupe owners used loupes regularly, a sizable proportion operated with limited vision and lack of comfort. Overall, just over half of respondents believed that loupes improve patient care and should be integrated into residency.