Immediate breast reconstructions after mastectomy due to breast cancers with the use of Serasynth and SeragynBR synthetic meshes. Single-oncological center experience, analysis of complications

IF 0.6 Q4 SURGERY
Aleksander Grous, Slawomir Mazur, Paweł Winter, Krzysztof Kozak, Agnieszka Jagiello-Gruszfeld, Marcin Napierala, Zbigniew Nowecki
{"title":"Immediate breast reconstructions after mastectomy due to breast cancers with the use of Serasynth and SeragynBR synthetic meshes. Single-oncological center experience, analysis of complications","authors":"Aleksander Grous, Slawomir Mazur, Paweł Winter, Krzysztof Kozak, Agnieszka Jagiello-Gruszfeld, Marcin Napierala, Zbigniew Nowecki","doi":"10.5604/01.3001.0016.3172","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"PurposeThe use of meshes in mastectomies with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become a gold standard. The purpose of the study was to analyze the complications and own experience with the use of Serasynth fully absorbable and SeragynBR partialy absorbable synthetic meshes. MethodsIn the period from December 2017 to July 2020, 118 IBR were performed in the Author’s Department with the use of SeragynBR and Serasynth meshes in 93 patients operated for breast cancer. 78 Serasynth meshes (Group1) and 40 SeragynBR meshes (Group1I) were implanted. ResultsThe most common complication was persistent seroma collection, which was reported in 17.9% of cases in Group1 and 25% in Group2. Skin inflammation was reported in 7.6% and 17.5%, while infections in 2.5% and 5% of the operated breasts in Group1 and Group2. Reoperation was required in 5.1% and 5% of the patients in Group1 and Group2. The percentage of complications was lower when Serasynth rather than Seragyn BR meshes were implanted. The frequent incidence of the seroma collection did not contribute in any significant way to serious complications such as removal of mesh/implant or infection. The complications, which developed following the implantation of both mesh types, were similar to those presented in other publications concerning mastectomy with IBR with the use of synthetic meshes. The percentage of implant losses/explanations in the discussed groups was lower than that reported in literature.ConclusionDespite the complications, both types of meshes can be considered as safe additions to reconstructive breast surgeries.","PeriodicalId":43422,"journal":{"name":"Polish Journal of Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Polish Journal of Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5604/01.3001.0016.3172","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

PurposeThe use of meshes in mastectomies with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become a gold standard. The purpose of the study was to analyze the complications and own experience with the use of Serasynth fully absorbable and SeragynBR partialy absorbable synthetic meshes. MethodsIn the period from December 2017 to July 2020, 118 IBR were performed in the Author’s Department with the use of SeragynBR and Serasynth meshes in 93 patients operated for breast cancer. 78 Serasynth meshes (Group1) and 40 SeragynBR meshes (Group1I) were implanted. ResultsThe most common complication was persistent seroma collection, which was reported in 17.9% of cases in Group1 and 25% in Group2. Skin inflammation was reported in 7.6% and 17.5%, while infections in 2.5% and 5% of the operated breasts in Group1 and Group2. Reoperation was required in 5.1% and 5% of the patients in Group1 and Group2. The percentage of complications was lower when Serasynth rather than Seragyn BR meshes were implanted. The frequent incidence of the seroma collection did not contribute in any significant way to serious complications such as removal of mesh/implant or infection. The complications, which developed following the implantation of both mesh types, were similar to those presented in other publications concerning mastectomy with IBR with the use of synthetic meshes. The percentage of implant losses/explanations in the discussed groups was lower than that reported in literature.ConclusionDespite the complications, both types of meshes can be considered as safe additions to reconstructive breast surgeries.
使用Serasynth和SeragynBR合成网片进行乳腺癌切除术后的即时乳房重建。单肿瘤中心经验,并发症分析
目的在乳房切除术合并即刻乳房重建术(IBR)中使用补片已成为一种金标准。本研究的目的是分析使用seragynth完全可吸收和SeragynBR部分可吸收合成网的并发症和自己的经验。方法2017年12月至2020年7月,作者科使用SeragynBR和Serasynth网片对93例乳腺癌手术患者行118例IBR。植入Serasynth网(Group1) 78张,SeragynBR网(Group1I) 40张。结果术后最常见的并发症是持续的血肿收集,组1和组2的发生率分别为17.9%和25%。皮肤炎症发生率分别为7.6%和17.5%,组1和组2术后乳房感染发生率分别为2.5%和5%。第1组和第2组分别有5.1%和5%的患者需要再次手术。植入Serasynth补片比植入Seragyn补片并发症发生率低。血肿收集的频繁发生不会以任何显著的方式导致严重的并发症,如网状物/植入物的取出或感染。两种补片植入后出现的并发症与其他关于使用合成补片的IBR乳房切除术的出版物中出现的并发症相似。讨论组种植体丢失/解释的百分比低于文献报道。结论尽管存在并发症,但两种补片均可作为乳房再造术的安全补充。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
62
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信