Conventional versus Robot-Assisted Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Reconstructive Outcome and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY Plastic and reconstructive surgery Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-20 DOI:10.1097/PRS.0000000000011205
Hyung Bae Kim, Jae Chung Min, Sae Byul Lee, Jisun Kim, Beom Seok Ko, Hee Jeong Kim, Byung Ho Son, Hyun Ho Han, Jin Sup Eom
{"title":"Conventional versus Robot-Assisted Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Reconstructive Outcome and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.","authors":"Hyung Bae Kim, Jae Chung Min, Sae Byul Lee, Jisun Kim, Beom Seok Ko, Hee Jeong Kim, Byung Ho Son, Hyun Ho Han, Jin Sup Eom","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000011205","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In this study, the authors compared conventional and robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to report the results of robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction and provide a comparison of patient-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective study included 473 breasts of 423 patients who underwent conventional mastectomy and breast reconstruction and 164 breasts of 153 patients who underwent robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction from July of 2019 to October of 2021. Demographic and oncologic data, reconstructive outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were evaluated. The results of implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction were evaluated separately.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Skin necrosis requiring surgical débridement occurred significantly more frequently in the conventional group (8.0%) than in the robot-assisted group (2.0%) in implant-based reconstruction ( P = 0.035). At 6 to 12 months, patients who underwent robot-assisted breast reconstruction showed a higher Sexual Well-being score for implant-based reconstruction and a higher Physical Well-being score for autologous breast reconstruction than conventional breast reconstruction according to the BREAST-Q questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction was associated with less skin necrosis and better patient-reported outcomes (Sexual Well-being for implant-based reconstruction and Physical Well-being for autologous breast reconstruction) than the conventional option. Robotic surgery could be a good option for mastectomy and breast reconstruction.</p><p><strong>Clinical question/level of evidence: </strong>Therapeutic, III.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":"3S-12S"},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000011205","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In this study, the authors compared conventional and robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to report the results of robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction and provide a comparison of patient-reported outcomes.

Method: This retrospective study included 473 breasts of 423 patients who underwent conventional mastectomy and breast reconstruction and 164 breasts of 153 patients who underwent robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction from July of 2019 to October of 2021. Demographic and oncologic data, reconstructive outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were evaluated. The results of implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction were evaluated separately.

Results: Skin necrosis requiring surgical débridement occurred significantly more frequently in the conventional group (8.0%) than in the robot-assisted group (2.0%) in implant-based reconstruction ( P = 0.035). At 6 to 12 months, patients who underwent robot-assisted breast reconstruction showed a higher Sexual Well-being score for implant-based reconstruction and a higher Physical Well-being score for autologous breast reconstruction than conventional breast reconstruction according to the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

Conclusions: Robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction was associated with less skin necrosis and better patient-reported outcomes (Sexual Well-being for implant-based reconstruction and Physical Well-being for autologous breast reconstruction) than the conventional option. Robotic surgery could be a good option for mastectomy and breast reconstruction.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

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
传统与机器人辅助的即时乳房重建:重建结果和患者报告的结果测量(PROMs)。
背景:本研究比较了传统和机器人辅助乳房切除术和乳房重建术。据我们所知,这项研究首次报道了机器人辅助乳房切除术和乳房重建的结果,并对患者报告的结果进行了比较。方法:回顾性研究包括2019年7月至2021年10月期间423例常规乳房切除术和乳房重建术患者的473个乳房和153例机器人辅助乳房切除术和乳房重建术患者的164个乳房。评估人口统计学和肿瘤学数据、重建结果和患者报告结果(BREAST-Q)。分别评价假体乳房重建和自体乳房重建的结果。结果:在植体重建中,需要手术清创的皮肤坏死在传统组(8.0%)中明显高于机器人辅助组(2.0%)(p=0.035)。根据breast - q问卷,在6-12个月时,机器人辅助乳房再造术的性健康评分高于基于植入物的乳房再造术,自体乳房再造术的身体健康评分高于传统乳房再造术。结论:与传统选择相比,机器人辅助乳房切除术和乳房重建术的皮肤坏死更少,患者报告的结果(植入性乳房重建术的性健康和自体乳房重建术的身体健康)更好。机器人手术可能是乳房切除术和乳房重建的好选择。
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
5.00
自引率
13.90%
发文量
1436
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.
期刊最新文献
Spontaneous recovery of active shoulder external rotation in patients with brachial plexus birth injury. Comparative effectiveness of pre-epiglottic baton plates and mandibular distraction in infants with Robin sequence. Long-Term Surgical Outcomes of Intermediate Cleft Rhinoplasty. Predictors of Facial Synkinesis Severity. The Racial Representation of Cosmetic Minimally Invasive Procedure Patients and Physicians on Social Media.
×
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