...
首页> 外文期刊>Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery: JPRAS >Comparing the donor-site morbidity using DIEP, SIEA or MS-TRAM flaps for breast reconstructive surgery: A meta-analysis
【24h】

Comparing the donor-site morbidity using DIEP, SIEA or MS-TRAM flaps for breast reconstructive surgery: A meta-analysis

机译:使用DIEP,SIEA或MS-TRAM皮瓣比较乳房重建手术中供体部位的发病率:一项荟萃分析

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background: Countless studies have compared the use of autologous tissue for breast reconstruction; however, rates of donor-site morbidity differ greatly. This study examined the donor-site morbidity of superficial inferior epigastric artery (SIEA), deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) and muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (MS-TRAM) flaps when used for unilateral breast reconstruction. Methods: Searches in PubMed and Medline as well as three manual search strategies for English-language articles published from 1 January 1995 to 1 January 2011 resulted in 2154 publications. Four levels of screening identified five studies suitable for the meta-analysis. StatsDirect software was used to perform the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effect model. Results: Only one study reported rates of donor-site morbidity for SIEA flaps. It was therefore impossible to perform any analysis regarding SIEA flaps. Five studies reported rates for both DIEP and MS-TRAM flaps and were used to estimate pooled relative risk (RR) and confidence intervals (CIs) of bulging. There was a 20% reduced risk of bulging when DIEP flaps were used compared to MS-TRAM flaps (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.48-1.35). Subgroup analysis demonstrated that the risk of bulging in DIEP flap patients was one-third of MS-TRAM flap patients (RR 0.29; 95% CI 0.06-1.36), when rates were reported by clinical examinations. However, when rates were reported by surveys there was no difference in bulge formation between DIEP and MS-TRAM flap patients (RR 1.04; 95% CI 0.59-1.79). The adjusted RR of hernia in DIEP flap patients was approximately one-half of MS-TRAM flap patients (RR 0.43; 95% CI 0.07-2.63). Conclusion: This analysis demonstrated a clear trend towards a favourable outcome when DIEP flaps were used compared to MS-TRAM flaps.
机译:背景:无数研究比较了自体组织在乳房重建中的应用。但是,供体部位的发病率差异很大。这项研究检查了浅表上腹下动脉(SIEA),上腹下深穿孔器(DIEP)和保留肌肉的腹直肌腹肌肌皮瓣(MS-TRAM)的供体部位发病率。方法:1995年1月1日至2011年1月1日在PubMed和Medline中进行的搜索以及三种针对英语文章的手动搜索策略,共获得2154种出版物。四个级别的筛选确定了五项适合荟萃分析的研究。 StatsDirect软件用于执行Mantel-Haenszel固定效果模型。结果:只有一项研究报告了SIEA皮瓣的供体部位发病率。因此,不可能对SIEA皮瓣进行任何分析。五项研究报告了DIEP和MS-TRAM皮瓣的发生率,并用于估计合并的相对风险(RR)和凸出的置信区间(CIs)。与MS-TRAM皮瓣相比,使用DIEP皮瓣时,鼓胀的风险降低了20%(RR 0.80,95%CI 0.48-1.35)。亚组分析表明,当通过临床检查报告发生率时,DIEP皮瓣患者出现鼓胀的风险是MS-TRAM皮瓣患者的三分之一(RR 0.29; 95%CI 0.06-1.36)。但是,当通过调查报告发病率时,DIEP和MS-TRAM皮瓣患者的隆起形成没有差异(RR 1.04; 95%CI 0.59-1.79)。 DIEP皮瓣患者的疝气校正后的RR约为MS-TRAM皮瓣患者的一半(RR 0.43; 95%CI 0.07-2.63)。结论:与MS-TRAM皮瓣相比,使用DIEP皮瓣时,该分析显示出明显的趋于良好结局的趋势。

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