扩张假体和DIEP皮瓣在延迟乳房重建中的应用:一项为期五年的随机随访研究中的敏感性、患者报告的结果和并发症。

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS
Linda Tallroth, Nathalie Mobargha, Patrik Velander, Magnus Becker, Stina Klasson
{"title":"扩张假体和DIEP皮瓣在延迟乳房重建中的应用:一项为期五年的随机随访研究中的敏感性、患者报告的结果和并发症。","authors":"Linda Tallroth,&nbsp;Nathalie Mobargha,&nbsp;Patrik Velander,&nbsp;Magnus Becker,&nbsp;Stina Klasson","doi":"10.2340/jphs.v58.13477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Breast reconstruction is a given choice for many women following mastectomy. There are a multitude of methods available today, and thus, comparative studies are essential to match patients with suitable methods. The aim of this study was to compare 5-year outcomes following delayed breast reconstruction with expander prosthesis (EP) and with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Seventy-three patients, previously randomised to either a permanent EP or a DIEP flap breast reconstruction, were invited for a 5-year follow-up. Assessments included symmetry measurements, breast sensibility with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments and patient-reported outcome (PRO) with the BREAST-Q. Complications within the first 5 postoperative years were recorded. Additionally, BREAST-Q questionnaires were collected from non-randomised patients with an EP breast reconstruction. Between 2019 and 2022, 65 patients completed the follow-ups. Symmetry and PRO were significantly higher in the DIEP flap group. However, EP-reconstructed breasts were significantly more sensate and demonstrated areas with protective sensibility, unlike the DIEP flap breasts. The overall complication rates were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.27). Regression analysis identified body mass index as a risk factor for reoperation in general anaesthesia and for wound infection. No significant differences were found in a comparison of the randomised and the non-randomised EP groups' BREAST-Q results. This randomised 5-year follow-up study found PRO to be favourable following a DIEP flap reconstruction and sensibility to be better in EP reconstructions. The complication rates were comparable; however, longer follow-ups are warranted to cover the complete lifespans of the two breast reconstruction methods.</p>","PeriodicalId":16847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Expander prosthesis and DIEP flaps in delayed breast reconstruction: Sensibility, patient-reported outcome, and complications in a five-year randomised follow-up study.\",\"authors\":\"Linda Tallroth,&nbsp;Nathalie Mobargha,&nbsp;Patrik Velander,&nbsp;Magnus Becker,&nbsp;Stina Klasson\",\"doi\":\"10.2340/jphs.v58.13477\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Breast reconstruction is a given choice for many women following mastectomy. There are a multitude of methods available today, and thus, comparative studies are essential to match patients with suitable methods. The aim of this study was to compare 5-year outcomes following delayed breast reconstruction with expander prosthesis (EP) and with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Seventy-three patients, previously randomised to either a permanent EP or a DIEP flap breast reconstruction, were invited for a 5-year follow-up. Assessments included symmetry measurements, breast sensibility with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments and patient-reported outcome (PRO) with the BREAST-Q. Complications within the first 5 postoperative years were recorded. Additionally, BREAST-Q questionnaires were collected from non-randomised patients with an EP breast reconstruction. Between 2019 and 2022, 65 patients completed the follow-ups. Symmetry and PRO were significantly higher in the DIEP flap group. However, EP-reconstructed breasts were significantly more sensate and demonstrated areas with protective sensibility, unlike the DIEP flap breasts. The overall complication rates were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.27). Regression analysis identified body mass index as a risk factor for reoperation in general anaesthesia and for wound infection. No significant differences were found in a comparison of the randomised and the non-randomised EP groups' BREAST-Q results. This randomised 5-year follow-up study found PRO to be favourable following a DIEP flap reconstruction and sensibility to be better in EP reconstructions. The complication rates were comparable; however, longer follow-ups are warranted to cover the complete lifespans of the two breast reconstruction methods.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16847,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2340/jphs.v58.13477\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ORTHOPEDICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2340/jphs.v58.13477","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

乳房重建是许多女性乳房切除术后的一个既定选择。目前有多种方法可用,因此,比较研究对于为患者匹配合适的方法至关重要。本研究的目的是比较扩张假体(EP)和上腹部深下穿支(DIEP)皮瓣延迟乳房重建后的5年结果。73名患者,之前被随机分为永久性EP或DIEP皮瓣乳房重建,被邀请进行5年随访。评估包括对称性测量、Semmes-Weinstein单丝对乳房的敏感性以及Breaast-Q患者报告的结果(PRO)。记录术后前5年的并发症。此外,还从EP乳房重建的非随机患者中收集了BREAT-Q问卷。2019年至2022年间,65名患者完成了随访。DIEP皮瓣组的对称性和PRO明显较高。然而,与DIEP皮瓣乳房不同,EP重建的乳房明显更灵敏,并显示出具有保护敏感性的区域。两组的总体并发症发生率具有可比性(p=0.27)。回归分析表明,体重指数是全麻下再次手术和伤口感染的风险因素。随机EP组和非随机EP组的BREAT-Q结果的比较没有发现显著差异。这项随机的5年随访研究发现,DIEP皮瓣重建后PRO是有利的,EP重建的敏感性更好。并发症发生率具有可比性;然而,需要更长的随访时间来覆盖这两种乳房重建方法的完整寿命。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Expander prosthesis and DIEP flaps in delayed breast reconstruction: Sensibility, patient-reported outcome, and complications in a five-year randomised follow-up study.

Breast reconstruction is a given choice for many women following mastectomy. There are a multitude of methods available today, and thus, comparative studies are essential to match patients with suitable methods. The aim of this study was to compare 5-year outcomes following delayed breast reconstruction with expander prosthesis (EP) and with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Seventy-three patients, previously randomised to either a permanent EP or a DIEP flap breast reconstruction, were invited for a 5-year follow-up. Assessments included symmetry measurements, breast sensibility with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments and patient-reported outcome (PRO) with the BREAST-Q. Complications within the first 5 postoperative years were recorded. Additionally, BREAST-Q questionnaires were collected from non-randomised patients with an EP breast reconstruction. Between 2019 and 2022, 65 patients completed the follow-ups. Symmetry and PRO were significantly higher in the DIEP flap group. However, EP-reconstructed breasts were significantly more sensate and demonstrated areas with protective sensibility, unlike the DIEP flap breasts. The overall complication rates were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.27). Regression analysis identified body mass index as a risk factor for reoperation in general anaesthesia and for wound infection. No significant differences were found in a comparison of the randomised and the non-randomised EP groups' BREAST-Q results. This randomised 5-year follow-up study found PRO to be favourable following a DIEP flap reconstruction and sensibility to be better in EP reconstructions. The complication rates were comparable; however, longer follow-ups are warranted to cover the complete lifespans of the two breast reconstruction methods.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
108
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The purpose of the Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery is to serve as an international forum for plastic surgery, hand surgery and related research. Interest is focused on original articles on basic research and clinical evaluation. The scope of the journal comprises: • Articles concerning operative methods and follow-up studies • Research articles on subjects related to plastic and hand surgery • Articles on cranio-maxillofacial surgery, including cleft lip and palate surgery. Extended issues are published occasionally, dealing with special topics such as microvascular surgery, craniofacial surgery, or burns. Supplements, usually doctoral theses, may also be published. The journal is published for the Acta Chirurgica Scandinavica society and sponsored by the Key Foundation, Sweden. The journal was previously published as Scandinavian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery.
×
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