...
首页> 外文期刊>Breast care >Influence of Incision Site on Postoperative Outcome in Skin-/Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Is There a Difference between Radial and Inframammary Incision?
【24h】

Influence of Incision Site on Postoperative Outcome in Skin-/Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Is There a Difference between Radial and Inframammary Incision?

机译:切口部位对皮肤/乳头稀疏乳房切除术后术后结果的影响:径向和血型切口之间有差异吗?

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in results between the radial and the inframammary approach in nipple-/skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Methods: The patients were divided into two groups (group 1: radial incision; group 2: inframammary fold incision [IMF]), each consisting of two subgroups for direct-to-implant reconstruction (1a, 2a) and expander reconstruction (1b, 2b). The patients were operated on between March 2012 and May 2017. Preoperative tumor parameters, reconstruction parameters, postoperative tumor parameters, and immediate and late complications were assessed. Postoperative photographs were evaluated by the patients and 8 plastic surgeons by means of grading (1–5) and the visual analog scale (VAS; 1–10). Results: Enrolled in this study were 28 patients, namely, 7 patients in each subgroup. The median age was 46 years, and the median follow-up period was 40 months. No immediate complications occurred. Three patients had late complications, but there was no case of evident capsular fibrosis. Twenty-seven patients (96.42%) evaluated the postoperative result as excellent/good. The postoperative evaluation by the plastic surgeons was excellent/good for a median of 18 patients (64.28%). Group 1 showed a median VAS score of 7.63 (expander group: 7.50; direct-to-implant group: 7.75); the median VAS score for group 2 was 8.25 (expander group: 8.75; direct-to-implant group: 7.50). Conclusions: Our study shows good results for implant breast reconstruction in both groups, with minimally better results for the IMF group. In the direct-to-implant subgroups, the radial group showed slightly better results.
机译:背景:本研究的目的是判断乳头/皮肤缓冲乳房切除术和立即重建中径向和血型碱方法之间是否存在差异。方法:将患者分为两组(第1组:径向切口;第2组:血型倍数切口[IMF]),每个次组由两种亚组,用于直接植入重建(1A,2A)和扩展器重建(1B, 2b)。患者于2012年3月至2017年5月期间进行运营。评估术前肿瘤参数,重建参数,术后肿瘤参数和立即和晚期并发症。术后照片由患者和8个整体外科医生评估通过分级(1-5)和视觉模拟量表(VAS; 1-10)。结果:注册本研究均为28名患者,即每组7例患者。中位年龄为46岁,中位随访期限为40个月。没有发生立即并发症。三名患者有晚期并发症,但没有明显的荚膜纤维化。二十七名患者(96.42%)评估术后结果为优秀/良好。整形外科医生的术后评估非常好/有益于18名患者(64.28%)。第1组显示中位数VAS得分为7.63(扩展器组:7.50;直接植入组:7.75);第2组的中位数VAS分数为8.25(膨胀机组:8.75;直接植入组:7.50)。结论:我们的研究表明,两组植入乳房重建的良好结果,对IMF组的效果更好。在直接植入的亚组中,径向组结果略有更好。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号