-
Something wrong with this record ?
Risk Comparison Using Autologous Dermal Flap and Absorbable Breast Mesh on Patient Undergoing Subcutaneous Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction
M. Patzelt, L. Zarubova, M. Vecerova, J. Barta, M. Ouzky, A. Sukop
Language English Country United States
Document type Journal Article
NLK
ProQuest Central
from 2002-11-01 to 1 year ago
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
from 2003-01-01 to 1 year ago
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
from 2002-11-01 to 1 year ago
- MeSH
- Surgical Mesh MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Mammaplasty * adverse effects methods MeSH
- Mastectomy methods MeSH
- Breast Neoplasms * surgery MeSH
- Necrosis surgery MeSH
- Nipples surgery MeSH
- Retrospective Studies MeSH
- Seroma surgery MeSH
- Mastectomy, Subcutaneous * methods MeSH
- Treatment Outcome MeSH
- Check Tag
- Humans MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
In patients with large breasts undergoing a subcutaneous mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction, is necessary to perform a mastopexy. The combination of these procedures increases the complication rate. To reduce it, it is necessary to cover the lower pole of the implant. Our study aimed to compare the use of an autologous dermal flap and an absorbable breast mesh. A total of 64 patients without previous breast surgery were divided into 2 groups, each with 32 patients. In the 1st group, the implant was covered with an autologous caudally based dermal flap, sutured to the great pectoral muscle. In the 2nd group, the implant was covered with a fully absorbable breast mesh, fixed caudally in the inframammary fold and cranially to the great pectoral muscle. The incidence of complications, the aesthetic effect, and patient satisfaction were evaluated in a one-year follow-up. In the 1st group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 partial nipple-areola complex necrosis, 4 cases of dehiscence in the T-suture, and the malposition of the implant in 2 patients. In the 2nd group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 cases of T-junction dehiscence, and 1 case of full nipple-areola complex necrosis, which resulted in implant loss. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the study groups. The dermal flap is more suitable for breasts with pronounced ptosis. The use of the synthetic mesh is suitable for smaller breasts, where the possible dermal flap would be too small to cover the implant. 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 .
Department of Plastic Surgery 3rd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Department of Plastic Surgery Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital Prague Czech Republic
Department of Radiology 3rd Faculty of Medicine Charles University Prague Czech Republic
Department of Radiology Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital Prague Czech Republic
References provided by Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc22025428
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20221031100959.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 221017s2022 xxu f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1007/s00266-022-02799-6 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)35165758
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxu
- 100 1_
- $a Patzelt, Matej $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic. matej.patzelt@fnkv.cz $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. matej.patzelt@fnkv.cz $1 https://orcid.org/http://orcid.org/0000000182695499
- 245 10
- $a Risk Comparison Using Autologous Dermal Flap and Absorbable Breast Mesh on Patient Undergoing Subcutaneous Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction / $c M. Patzelt, L. Zarubova, M. Vecerova, J. Barta, M. Ouzky, A. Sukop
- 520 9_
- $a In patients with large breasts undergoing a subcutaneous mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction, is necessary to perform a mastopexy. The combination of these procedures increases the complication rate. To reduce it, it is necessary to cover the lower pole of the implant. Our study aimed to compare the use of an autologous dermal flap and an absorbable breast mesh. A total of 64 patients without previous breast surgery were divided into 2 groups, each with 32 patients. In the 1st group, the implant was covered with an autologous caudally based dermal flap, sutured to the great pectoral muscle. In the 2nd group, the implant was covered with a fully absorbable breast mesh, fixed caudally in the inframammary fold and cranially to the great pectoral muscle. The incidence of complications, the aesthetic effect, and patient satisfaction were evaluated in a one-year follow-up. In the 1st group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 partial nipple-areola complex necrosis, 4 cases of dehiscence in the T-suture, and the malposition of the implant in 2 patients. In the 2nd group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 cases of T-junction dehiscence, and 1 case of full nipple-areola complex necrosis, which resulted in implant loss. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the study groups. The dermal flap is more suitable for breasts with pronounced ptosis. The use of the synthetic mesh is suitable for smaller breasts, where the possible dermal flap would be too small to cover the implant. 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 .
- 650 12
- $a nádory prsu $x chirurgie $7 D001943
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 12
- $a mamoplastika $x škodlivé účinky $x metody $7 D016462
- 650 _2
- $a mastektomie $x metody $7 D008408
- 650 12
- $a subkutánní mastektomie $x metody $7 D015414
- 650 _2
- $a nekróza $x chirurgie $7 D009336
- 650 _2
- $a prsní bradavky $x chirurgie $7 D009558
- 650 _2
- $a retrospektivní studie $7 D012189
- 650 _2
- $a serom $x chirurgie $7 D049291
- 650 _2
- $a chirurgické síťky $7 D013526
- 650 _2
- $a výsledek terapie $7 D016896
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 700 1_
- $a Zarubova, Lucie $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Vecerova, Michaela $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Barta, Josef $u Department of Radiology, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Radiology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Ouzky, Martin $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 700 1_
- $a Sukop, Andrej $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Royal Vinohrady Teaching Hospital, Prague, Czech Republic $u Department of Plastic Surgery, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
- 773 0_
- $w MED00005691 $t Aesthetic plastic surgery $x 1432-5241 $g Roč. 46, č. 3 (2022), s. 1145-1152
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35165758 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y p $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20221017 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20221031100957 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1854911 $s 1176718
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2022 $b 46 $c 3 $d 1145-1152 $e 20220214 $i 1432-5241 $m Aesthetic plastic surgery $n Aesthetic Plast Surg $x MED00005691
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20221017
