Giuseppe Angelo Giovanni Lombardo, Francesco Ciancio, Francesco Ruben Giardino, Alessio Stivala, Dario Melita, Paolo Marchica, Rosario Ranno, Domenico Marrella
{"title":"闭合切口负压治疗在DIEP皮瓣乳房供区再造术中的临床应用。","authors":"Giuseppe Angelo Giovanni Lombardo, Francesco Ciancio, Francesco Ruben Giardino, Alessio Stivala, Dario Melita, Paolo Marchica, Rosario Ranno, Domenico Marrella","doi":"10.1007/s13304-025-02207-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The donor-site wound from deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction differs from abdominoplasty due to higher positioning and tension, potentially affecting healing. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy has been proposed to improve wound healing and reduce complications. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of this tool on donor-site wound's complications and scar-related patient outcomes. This retrospective cohort study included 140 patients who underwent delayed deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction between September 2020 and March 2023. Patients were assigned to Group A (closed-incision negative-pressure therapy) or group B (micropore tape dressings). Both groups received standardized perioperative care. Complications were analyzed, and scar were assessed 1 year postoperatively using SCAR-Q. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics. Wound dehiscence was significantly lower in Group A compared to Group B (p = 0.0003). The mean time to wound healing after dehiscence was similar between groups (p = 0.270). No significant differences were found in other complications, such as infection or hematoma. Concerning SCAR-Q, patients in Group A reported significantly better outcomes on the symptom scale (p = 0.03), whereas no significant differences were observed for appearance or psychosocial impact. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy reduced the rate of wound dehiscence but did not significantly improve scar quality or other complications. Given the limited benefits and lack of cost-effectiveness data, this tool should be considered for further study rather than routine clinical use in low-risk deep inferior epigastric perforator flap patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":23391,"journal":{"name":"Updates in Surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical impact of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in DIEP flap breast reconstruction's donor site.\",\"authors\":\"Giuseppe Angelo Giovanni Lombardo, Francesco Ciancio, Francesco Ruben Giardino, Alessio Stivala, Dario Melita, Paolo Marchica, Rosario Ranno, Domenico Marrella\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s13304-025-02207-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The donor-site wound from deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction differs from abdominoplasty due to higher positioning and tension, potentially affecting healing. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy has been proposed to improve wound healing and reduce complications. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of this tool on donor-site wound's complications and scar-related patient outcomes. This retrospective cohort study included 140 patients who underwent delayed deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction between September 2020 and March 2023. Patients were assigned to Group A (closed-incision negative-pressure therapy) or group B (micropore tape dressings). Both groups received standardized perioperative care. Complications were analyzed, and scar were assessed 1 year postoperatively using SCAR-Q. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics. Wound dehiscence was significantly lower in Group A compared to Group B (p = 0.0003). The mean time to wound healing after dehiscence was similar between groups (p = 0.270). No significant differences were found in other complications, such as infection or hematoma. Concerning SCAR-Q, patients in Group A reported significantly better outcomes on the symptom scale (p = 0.03), whereas no significant differences were observed for appearance or psychosocial impact. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy reduced the rate of wound dehiscence but did not significantly improve scar quality or other complications. Given the limited benefits and lack of cost-effectiveness data, this tool should be considered for further study rather than routine clinical use in low-risk deep inferior epigastric perforator flap patients.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Updates in Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02207-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Updates in Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s13304-025-02207-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical impact of closed-incision negative-pressure therapy in DIEP flap breast reconstruction's donor site.
The donor-site wound from deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction differs from abdominoplasty due to higher positioning and tension, potentially affecting healing. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy has been proposed to improve wound healing and reduce complications. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of this tool on donor-site wound's complications and scar-related patient outcomes. This retrospective cohort study included 140 patients who underwent delayed deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction between September 2020 and March 2023. Patients were assigned to Group A (closed-incision negative-pressure therapy) or group B (micropore tape dressings). Both groups received standardized perioperative care. Complications were analyzed, and scar were assessed 1 year postoperatively using SCAR-Q. Statistical significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. There were no significant differences between the two groups in baseline characteristics. Wound dehiscence was significantly lower in Group A compared to Group B (p = 0.0003). The mean time to wound healing after dehiscence was similar between groups (p = 0.270). No significant differences were found in other complications, such as infection or hematoma. Concerning SCAR-Q, patients in Group A reported significantly better outcomes on the symptom scale (p = 0.03), whereas no significant differences were observed for appearance or psychosocial impact. Closed-incision negative-pressure therapy reduced the rate of wound dehiscence but did not significantly improve scar quality or other complications. Given the limited benefits and lack of cost-effectiveness data, this tool should be considered for further study rather than routine clinical use in low-risk deep inferior epigastric perforator flap patients.
期刊介绍:
Updates in Surgery (UPIS) has been founded in 2010 as the official journal of the Italian Society of Surgery. It’s an international, English-language, peer-reviewed journal dedicated to the surgical sciences. Its main goal is to offer a valuable update on the most recent developments of those surgical techniques that are rapidly evolving, forcing the community of surgeons to a rigorous debate and a continuous refinement of standards of care. In this respect position papers on the mostly debated surgical approaches and accreditation criteria have been published and are welcome for the future.
Beside its focus on general surgery, the journal draws particular attention to cutting edge topics and emerging surgical fields that are publishing in monothematic issues guest edited by well-known experts.
Updates in Surgery has been considering various types of papers: editorials, comprehensive reviews, original studies and technical notes related to specific surgical procedures and techniques on liver, colorectal, gastric, pancreatic, robotic and bariatric surgery.