A prospective comparison of prepectoral and subpectoral methods for immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: the cogwheel-shaped anterior wrapping method

IF 0.2 Q4 SURGERY
Sun Eung Kim, Y. Chun, H. Park, Y. J. Kim, Y. Cheon
{"title":"A prospective comparison of prepectoral and subpectoral methods for immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: the cogwheel-shaped anterior wrapping method","authors":"Sun Eung Kim, Y. Chun, H. Park, Y. J. Kim, Y. Cheon","doi":"10.14730/aaps.2022.00570","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background Prepectoral breast reconstruction has recently gained wide recognition for its advantages, such as rapid recovery and less pain. This study compared the effectiveness of and differences between the prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction techniques.Methods Eighty-three patients (90 breasts) who underwent prepectoral or subpectoral breast reconstruction surgery between January 2019 and December 2020 were prospectively recruited. Patient demographics, comorbidities, oncological treatment, and intraoperative and postoperative data were evaluated to investigate the validity and stability of each surgical technique. The follow-up period was a minimum of 18 months.Results The surgical cohorts (22 prepectoral and 68 subpectoral) had comparable demographics. No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed between the two groups. The prepectoral group showed shorter operation times than the subpectoral group (mean: 97.27 and 127.63 minutes, respectively; P<0.001). Fewer days elapsed until drain removal and the total amount of drainage was less in the prepectoral group than in the subpectoral group (mean: postoperative day [POD] 8.95 and 10.06, respectively; P=0.048) and (501.72 mL and 671.19 mL, respectively; P=0.009). The numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores at POD 7 were significantly lower in the prepectoral group than in the subpectoral group (mean: 0.41 and 1.82, respectively; P=0.029). There were no statistically significant differences in the NPRS scores at POD 1 or the BREAST-Q questionnaire scores at 3 months.Conclusions Prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix can feasibly replace the conventional subpectoral breast reconstruction technique and has the advantages of reducing operation time, length of hospitalization, and long-term postoperative pain.","PeriodicalId":41514,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.14730/aaps.2022.00570","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

Background Prepectoral breast reconstruction has recently gained wide recognition for its advantages, such as rapid recovery and less pain. This study compared the effectiveness of and differences between the prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction techniques.Methods Eighty-three patients (90 breasts) who underwent prepectoral or subpectoral breast reconstruction surgery between January 2019 and December 2020 were prospectively recruited. Patient demographics, comorbidities, oncological treatment, and intraoperative and postoperative data were evaluated to investigate the validity and stability of each surgical technique. The follow-up period was a minimum of 18 months.Results The surgical cohorts (22 prepectoral and 68 subpectoral) had comparable demographics. No significant differences in postoperative complications were observed between the two groups. The prepectoral group showed shorter operation times than the subpectoral group (mean: 97.27 and 127.63 minutes, respectively; P<0.001). Fewer days elapsed until drain removal and the total amount of drainage was less in the prepectoral group than in the subpectoral group (mean: postoperative day [POD] 8.95 and 10.06, respectively; P=0.048) and (501.72 mL and 671.19 mL, respectively; P=0.009). The numeric pain rating scale (NPRS) scores at POD 7 were significantly lower in the prepectoral group than in the subpectoral group (mean: 0.41 and 1.82, respectively; P=0.029). There were no statistically significant differences in the NPRS scores at POD 1 or the BREAST-Q questionnaire scores at 3 months.Conclusions Prepectoral breast reconstruction using acellular dermal matrix can feasibly replace the conventional subpectoral breast reconstruction technique and has the advantages of reducing operation time, length of hospitalization, and long-term postoperative pain.
胸前和胸下即刻乳房重建方法的前瞻性比较与脱细胞真皮基质:齿状前包覆法
背景乳房前重建术因其恢复快、疼痛少等优点近年来得到了广泛的认可。本研究比较了胸前和胸下乳房重建技术的有效性和差异。方法前瞻性招募2019年1月至2020年12月期间行胸前或胸下乳房重建手术的患者83例(90个乳房)。评估患者人口统计学、合并症、肿瘤治疗以及术中和术后数据,以调查每种手术技术的有效性和稳定性。随访期至少为18个月。结果手术队列(胸前22例,胸下68例)具有可比的人口统计学特征。两组术后并发症无明显差异。胸前组手术时间短于胸下组,平均分别为97.27分钟和127.63分钟;P < 0.001)。胸前组的引流时间和总引流量均少于胸下组(平均:术后日[POD]分别为8.95和10.06;P=0.048)、501.72 mL、671.19 mL;P = 0.009)。在POD 7时,胸前组的数值疼痛评定量表(NPRS)得分明显低于胸下组(平均值分别为0.41和1.82;P = 0.029)。POD 1时NPRS评分和3个月时BREAST-Q问卷评分差异无统计学意义。结论脱细胞真皮基质胸下乳房再造术可替代传统的胸下乳房再造术,具有缩短手术时间、缩短住院时间、减少术后长期疼痛等优点。
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
自引率
33.30%
发文量
35
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信