{"title":"Comparison of Aesthetic Results of Mercedes-Y Versus Inverted-V Incision for Umbilical Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Abolfazl Abbaszadeh, Siamak Farokh Forghani, Fatemeh Ziaeifar, Vahab Rezaee, Siavash Mahdigholizad, Reza Vaghardoost, Rana Irilouzadian","doi":"10.1007/s00266-024-04405-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The appearance and position of navel which are considered as a marker for overall abdominal aesthetics, are important for the final results of abdominal surgeries. However, reconstructing and improving its appearance have been a challenge in plastic surgery.</p><p><strong>Hypothesis: </strong>In this study, we aimed to compare satisfaction of the patients and the plastic surgery professors with the aesthetic results of the two methods of umbilical reconstruction: Mercedes (Y) incision versus inverted-V incision.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This is a randomized clinical trial performed on umbilicoplasty patients following abdominoplasty, breast reconstruction, or abdominal flap surgery whom referred to our center. They were divided into two equal groups of twenty patients with Mercedes (Y) incision and patients with inverted-V incision. The results of surgery were compared three months after the surgery by the opinions of patients, plastic surgery professors, and unbiased observers.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The average scores of patients, professors, and observers showed that Mercedes (Y) had significantly higher scores compared to inverted-V incision in terms of position, size, shape, natural appearance, and the overall satisfaction. Surgical complications including stenosis, necrosis, and wound dehiscence were not statistically different in our small sample size.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this study, Mercedes (Y) incision was preferred by all of the groups in all five parameters that were assessed including size, shape, position, natural appearance, and overall satisfaction. The simplicity of the Y incision with less visible scar makes it a suitable method for further investigations with a larger sample size. Level of Evidence I This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .</p>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-024-04405-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The appearance and position of navel which are considered as a marker for overall abdominal aesthetics, are important for the final results of abdominal surgeries. However, reconstructing and improving its appearance have been a challenge in plastic surgery.
Hypothesis: In this study, we aimed to compare satisfaction of the patients and the plastic surgery professors with the aesthetic results of the two methods of umbilical reconstruction: Mercedes (Y) incision versus inverted-V incision.
Methods: This is a randomized clinical trial performed on umbilicoplasty patients following abdominoplasty, breast reconstruction, or abdominal flap surgery whom referred to our center. They were divided into two equal groups of twenty patients with Mercedes (Y) incision and patients with inverted-V incision. The results of surgery were compared three months after the surgery by the opinions of patients, plastic surgery professors, and unbiased observers.
Results: The average scores of patients, professors, and observers showed that Mercedes (Y) had significantly higher scores compared to inverted-V incision in terms of position, size, shape, natural appearance, and the overall satisfaction. Surgical complications including stenosis, necrosis, and wound dehiscence were not statistically different in our small sample size.
Conclusion: In this study, Mercedes (Y) incision was preferred by all of the groups in all five parameters that were assessed including size, shape, position, natural appearance, and overall satisfaction. The simplicity of the Y incision with less visible scar makes it a suitable method for further investigations with a larger sample size. Level of Evidence I This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
期刊介绍:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP).
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships.
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.