Latissimus dorsi flap (LD-flap) or endoprosthesis for breast reconstruction? Which is optimal for immediate reconstruction after a nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients?

V. Cheshuk, M. Anikusko, V. Kozina, V. Gurianov
{"title":"Latissimus dorsi flap (LD-flap) or endoprosthesis for breast reconstruction? Which is optimal for immediate reconstruction after a nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients?","authors":"V. Cheshuk, M. Anikusko, V. Kozina, V. Gurianov","doi":"10.30978/gs-2022-2-48","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article analyzes two methods of breast reconstruction: breast reconstruction with an implant or an LD‑flap after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy in the case of complex treatment of stage I — III breast cancer. In many works, the advantages and disadvantages of different types of reconstruction are indicated and contradictions can often be found, although most prefer reconstruction with implants. \nObjective — to compare the results of immediate breast reconstruction using an implant or an ­LD‑flap after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy in patients with I — III stages of breast cancer. \nMaterials and methods. We conducted a comparative study of the results of immediate reconstruction of the mammary gland after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy using the method of putting a silicone implant (endoprosthesis) or the method of LD‑flap reconstruction. Randomization was not carried out. The results of operative interventions were retrospectively and parallelly compared in two groups: reconstruction of the mammary gland with an implant (1) or LD flap (2). In both groups of 30 patients, all patients were diagnosed with stage I — III breast cancer and in most cases (80 — 83 %) received preoperative chemotherapy for regression and reduction of the stage of the process. The evaluation of the treatment result was carried out according to aesthetic indicators, oncological survival indicators, and the subjective evaluation of the aesthetic result by patients. \nResults. During the observation period since 2018, the analysis of the frequency of development in the groups of relapses and metastases during the 4‑year observation period (since 2018), the frequency of development of local complications in both groups: hematomas, skin necrosis, implant extrusions, seromas, lymphorrhea, capsular contractures, liponecrosis, lymphostasis of the upper extremity on the side of the operation, the degree and duration of the pain syndrome in the postoperative area, and the possibility of a full course of treatment did not show significant differences during the observation period. The quality of life in both groups, according to the Spitzer scale, was comparable (in the first group, 64 %, and in the second group, it was 63 %). Only the duration of postoperative bed rest was longer in the LD flap reconstruction group. \nConclusions. The results of the analysis of the study’s data showed that there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods. According to the findings, it is difficult to conclude which of the methods is more optimal, but it is necessary to choose the technique based on the constitutional characteristics of the patient and the size and shape of the mammary gland. An individualized and comprehensive approach is important. \n ","PeriodicalId":12661,"journal":{"name":"General Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"General Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30978/gs-2022-2-48","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article analyzes two methods of breast reconstruction: breast reconstruction with an implant or an LD‑flap after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy in the case of complex treatment of stage I — III breast cancer. In many works, the advantages and disadvantages of different types of reconstruction are indicated and contradictions can often be found, although most prefer reconstruction with implants. Objective — to compare the results of immediate breast reconstruction using an implant or an ­LD‑flap after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy in patients with I — III stages of breast cancer. Materials and methods. We conducted a comparative study of the results of immediate reconstruction of the mammary gland after a subcutaneous nipple‑sparing mastectomy using the method of putting a silicone implant (endoprosthesis) or the method of LD‑flap reconstruction. Randomization was not carried out. The results of operative interventions were retrospectively and parallelly compared in two groups: reconstruction of the mammary gland with an implant (1) or LD flap (2). In both groups of 30 patients, all patients were diagnosed with stage I — III breast cancer and in most cases (80 — 83 %) received preoperative chemotherapy for regression and reduction of the stage of the process. The evaluation of the treatment result was carried out according to aesthetic indicators, oncological survival indicators, and the subjective evaluation of the aesthetic result by patients. Results. During the observation period since 2018, the analysis of the frequency of development in the groups of relapses and metastases during the 4‑year observation period (since 2018), the frequency of development of local complications in both groups: hematomas, skin necrosis, implant extrusions, seromas, lymphorrhea, capsular contractures, liponecrosis, lymphostasis of the upper extremity on the side of the operation, the degree and duration of the pain syndrome in the postoperative area, and the possibility of a full course of treatment did not show significant differences during the observation period. The quality of life in both groups, according to the Spitzer scale, was comparable (in the first group, 64 %, and in the second group, it was 63 %). Only the duration of postoperative bed rest was longer in the LD flap reconstruction group. Conclusions. The results of the analysis of the study’s data showed that there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods. According to the findings, it is difficult to conclude which of the methods is more optimal, but it is necessary to choose the technique based on the constitutional characteristics of the patient and the size and shape of the mammary gland. An individualized and comprehensive approach is important.  
背阔肌瓣(ld -瓣)还是乳房再造?乳腺癌患者保留乳头乳房切除术后立即重建的最佳方法是什么?
本文分析了I - III期乳腺癌复杂治疗的两种乳房再造术:保留乳头皮下乳房切除术后植体再造术和LD瓣再造术。在许多作品中,指出了不同类型重建的优点和缺点,并经常发现矛盾,尽管大多数人更倾向于植入物重建。目的:比较I - III期乳腺癌患者保留乳头皮下乳房切除术后使用植入物或- ld -皮瓣立即乳房重建的结果。材料和方法。我们对保留乳头皮下乳房切除术后即刻乳腺重建的结果进行了比较研究,采用硅胶植入(假体)或LD瓣重建的方法。未进行随机化。回顾性并平行比较两组手术干预的结果:用植入物重建乳腺(1)或LD皮瓣重建乳腺(2)。在两组30例患者中,所有患者都被诊断为I - III期乳腺癌,大多数病例(80 - 83%)接受了术前化疗以恢复和减少病程。根据美观指标、肿瘤生存指标和患者对美观结果的主观评价对治疗结果进行评价。结果。2018年以来观察期内,分析4年观察期内(2018年以来)复发组和转移组发生频率,两组局部并发症发生频率:术侧上肢血肿、皮肤坏死、植入物突出、血清肿、淋巴漏、包膜挛缩、脂质坏死、淋巴淤积,术后区域疼痛综合征的程度、持续时间及全程治疗的可能性在观察期内均无显著差异。根据斯皮策量表,两组患者的生活质量相当(第一组为64%,第二组为63%)。仅LD瓣重建组术后卧床休息时间较长。结论。对研究数据的分析结果表明,这两种方法各有优缺点。根据这些发现,很难得出哪种方法更优,但有必要根据患者的体质特征和乳腺的大小和形状来选择技术。个性化和综合的方法很重要。
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
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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