ADM-assisted prepectoral breast reconstruction is not associated with high complication rate as before: a Meta-analysis.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q3 ORTHOPEDICS Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.1080/2000656X.2021.1981351
Jiaheng Xie, Ming Wang, Yuan Cao, Zhechen Zhu, Shujie Ruan, Mengmeng Ou, Pan Yu, Jingping Shi
{"title":"ADM-assisted prepectoral breast reconstruction is not associated with high complication rate as before: a Meta-analysis.","authors":"Jiaheng Xie,&nbsp;Ming Wang,&nbsp;Yuan Cao,&nbsp;Zhechen Zhu,&nbsp;Shujie Ruan,&nbsp;Mengmeng Ou,&nbsp;Pan Yu,&nbsp;Jingping Shi","doi":"10.1080/2000656X.2021.1981351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Implant-related breast reconstruction can be divided into subpectoral breast reconstruction (SPBR) and prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) according to the different anatomical planes. The previous stereotype was that PPBR had a high complication rate and was not suitable for clinical use. However, with the emergence of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), the clinical effect of PPBR has been improved. To compare the outcomes difference between SPBR and PPBR, We conducted this meta-analysis. Articles on SPBR versus PPBR were searched in PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase, and Cochrane databases, strictly following the PRISMA guidelines. According to the set criteria, we included the literature that met the requirements. Extracted data were the incidence of adverse events and the duration of drainage. Results show that SPBR has a higher incidence rate in capsular contracture, animation deformity, infection, hematoma and delayed healing wound than PPBR. There are no significant differences in skin flap necrosis, seroma, implant loss, reoperation and duration of drainage between the two groups. Hence, PPBR is no longer a high complication surgical method and can be used in the clinical practice. However, there are few large sample studies at present, so it is necessary to carry out further studies on PPBR.</p>","PeriodicalId":16847,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery","volume":"57 1-6","pages":"7-15"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"12","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/2000656X.2021.1981351","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: 12

Abstract

Implant-related breast reconstruction can be divided into subpectoral breast reconstruction (SPBR) and prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) according to the different anatomical planes. The previous stereotype was that PPBR had a high complication rate and was not suitable for clinical use. However, with the emergence of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), the clinical effect of PPBR has been improved. To compare the outcomes difference between SPBR and PPBR, We conducted this meta-analysis. Articles on SPBR versus PPBR were searched in PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase, and Cochrane databases, strictly following the PRISMA guidelines. According to the set criteria, we included the literature that met the requirements. Extracted data were the incidence of adverse events and the duration of drainage. Results show that SPBR has a higher incidence rate in capsular contracture, animation deformity, infection, hematoma and delayed healing wound than PPBR. There are no significant differences in skin flap necrosis, seroma, implant loss, reoperation and duration of drainage between the two groups. Hence, PPBR is no longer a high complication surgical method and can be used in the clinical practice. However, there are few large sample studies at present, so it is necessary to carry out further studies on PPBR.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一项荟萃分析显示,adm辅助的产前乳房重建术不像以前那样与高并发症发生率相关。
假体相关乳房再造术根据解剖平面的不同分为胸下乳房再造术(SPBR)和胸前乳房再造术(PPBR)。以往的刻板印象是PPBR并发症发生率高,不适合临床应用。然而,随着脱细胞真皮基质(ADM)的出现,PPBR的临床效果得到了改善。为了比较SPBR和PPBR的结果差异,我们进行了这项荟萃分析。在PubMed, Web of Sciences, Embase和Cochrane数据库中检索了SPBR与PPBR的文章,严格遵循PRISMA指南。根据设定的标准,我们纳入了符合要求的文献。提取的数据为不良事件发生率和引流时间。结果表明SPBR在包膜挛缩、动画畸形、感染、血肿和伤口延迟愈合方面的发生率高于PPBR。两组皮瓣坏死、血肿、种植体丢失、再手术、引流时间差异无统计学意义。因此,PPBR不再是一种高并发症的手术方法,可以应用于临床。但目前大样本研究较少,有必要对PPBR进行进一步的研究。
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 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.
期刊最新文献
An evaluation of the scapular osseous free flap in maxillary reconstruction using the FACE-Q Head and Neck Cancer Module for patient-reported outcome measures. Arthroscopic-assisted total wrist arthrodesis: surgical design and clinical outcomes. A reliable and objective method of measuring soft tissue changes in 2D photographs after distraction osteogenesis in individuals with CL/P. Clinical presentation of hemifacial microsomia in a South African population. Variations in orbital morphology, globe:orbit volume relation, and ophthalmological outcome in unicoronal synostosis.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1