{"title":"Comparison of Non-liposuction and Liposuction Techniques in Single-port Endoscopic Subcutaneous Mastectomy for Gynecomastia: A Retrospective Analysis.","authors":"Yuming Shao, Jie Zhang, Huanyu Lu, Shoukun Xue, Chao Fang, Yuyang Li, Kunbing Zhu","doi":"10.1007/s00266-025-05050-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Gynecomastia (GM) is a common benign proliferation of male breast tissue that can significantly impact patients' physical and mental health. Endoscopic subcutaneous mastectomy (ESCM) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive approach for treating GM. However, the relative efficacy of different techniques for creating operative space during ESCM remains unclear. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of non-liposuction and liposuction techniques in single-port ESCM for GM treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective study included 41 GM patients who underwent single-port ESCM via bilateral axillary approach at Shandong Maternal and Child Health Hospital between September 2022 and September 2023. Patients were divided into non-liposuction (n=20) and liposuction (n=21) groups. Operative time, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, complication rates, and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>All procedures were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery. The non-liposuction group had significantly shorter mean operative time compared to the liposuction group (124.30 vs 168.81 minutes, P<0.001). Postoperative day 1 drainage volume was also significantly lower in the non-liposuction group (43.40 vs 107.05 mL, P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, complication rates, or patient satisfaction between the two groups. The overall complication rate was 7.3% (3/41), with two cases in the liposuction group and one in the non-liposuction group. No recurrences were reported during the 12-month follow-up period.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Single-port ESCM is a safe and effective method for treating GM. Compared to the liposuction technique, the non-liposuction approach demonstrates significant advantages in reducing operative time and postoperative drainage volume while maintaining comparable safety and patient satisfaction. These findings provide new insights for optimizing GM treatment strategies and potentially improving patient outcomes.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence iv: </strong>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":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-11","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/s00266-025-05050-0","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: Gynecomastia (GM) is a common benign proliferation of male breast tissue that can significantly impact patients' physical and mental health. Endoscopic subcutaneous mastectomy (ESCM) has emerged as a promising minimally invasive approach for treating GM. However, the relative efficacy of different techniques for creating operative space during ESCM remains unclear. This study aims to compare the clinical outcomes of non-liposuction and liposuction techniques in single-port ESCM for GM treatment.
Methods: This retrospective study included 41 GM patients who underwent single-port ESCM via bilateral axillary approach at Shandong Maternal and Child Health Hospital between September 2022 and September 2023. Patients were divided into non-liposuction (n=20) and liposuction (n=21) groups. Operative time, blood loss, postoperative drainage volume, complication rates, and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups.
Results: All procedures were successfully completed without conversion to open surgery. The non-liposuction group had significantly shorter mean operative time compared to the liposuction group (124.30 vs 168.81 minutes, P<0.001). Postoperative day 1 drainage volume was also significantly lower in the non-liposuction group (43.40 vs 107.05 mL, P<0.001). No significant differences were observed in intraoperative blood loss, complication rates, or patient satisfaction between the two groups. The overall complication rate was 7.3% (3/41), with two cases in the liposuction group and one in the non-liposuction group. No recurrences were reported during the 12-month follow-up period.
Conclusion: Single-port ESCM is a safe and effective method for treating GM. Compared to the liposuction technique, the non-liposuction approach demonstrates significant advantages in reducing operative time and postoperative drainage volume while maintaining comparable safety and patient satisfaction. These findings provide new insights for optimizing GM treatment strategies and potentially improving patient outcomes.
Level of evidence iv: 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.