乳房切除术后皮瓣坏死的假体乳房重建的预后:失败和挽救的预测因素。

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Pub Date : 2025-01-27 DOI:10.1007/s00266-025-04695-1
Woo-Ju Kim, Se-Yeon Park, Goo-Hyun Mun, Sa-Ik Bang, Byung-Joon Jeon, Jai-Kyong Pyon, Kyeong-Tae Lee
{"title":"乳房切除术后皮瓣坏死的假体乳房重建的预后:失败和挽救的预测因素。","authors":"Woo-Ju Kim,&nbsp;Se-Yeon Park,&nbsp;Goo-Hyun Mun,&nbsp;Sa-Ik Bang,&nbsp;Byung-Joon Jeon,&nbsp;Jai-Kyong Pyon,&nbsp;Kyeong-Tae Lee","doi":"10.1007/s00266-025-04695-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In the realm of implant-based breast reconstruction, mastectomy flap necrosis (MFN) is a prevalent yet grave complication that poses a threat to the stability of the inserted prosthesis. Although numerous investigations have scrutinized the risk factors for MFN development, few have delved into the aftermath, specifically implant failure or salvage. This study seeks to appraise the prognosis of the implanted prosthesis following MFN occurrence, as well as identify predictors of such outcomes.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Among patients who underwent immediate implant-based reconstruction between 2010 and 2022, individuals with MFN development were identified and scrutinized regarding the fate of their prosthesis (salvaged/failed). Independent risk factors were identified using multivariable analyses and subgroup analyses accounting for diverse clinical settings.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Among a total of 3128 cases, 422 of MFN (194 partial, 228 full-thickness necrosis) were examined. Of them, 384 prostheses (91%) were salvaged, while 38 (9%) failed. Multivariate analysis revealed predictors of reconstruction failure included nipple-sparing mastectomy, larger skin excision, type of acellular dermal matrix used, previous radiotherapy, and full-thickness necrosis, while operation procedures, including type of operation and plane for prosthesis insertion (prepectoral/subpectoral), showed no significant associations. Risk factors differed by insertion plane, with obesity, larger skin excision, and previous radiation history significant in the prepectoral group, and only MFN degree influencing successful salvage in the subpectoral.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study sheds light on the importance of understanding the prognosis and potential predictors of implant failure/salvage following MFN, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches to minimize the risk of reconstruction failure.</p><h3>Level of Evidence III</h3><p>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 Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7609,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","volume":"49 11","pages":"3081 - 3091"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Prognosis of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy Flap Necrosis: Predictors of Failure and Salvage\",\"authors\":\"Woo-Ju Kim,&nbsp;Se-Yeon Park,&nbsp;Goo-Hyun Mun,&nbsp;Sa-Ik Bang,&nbsp;Byung-Joon Jeon,&nbsp;Jai-Kyong Pyon,&nbsp;Kyeong-Tae Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s00266-025-04695-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>In the realm of implant-based breast reconstruction, mastectomy flap necrosis (MFN) is a prevalent yet grave complication that poses a threat to the stability of the inserted prosthesis. Although numerous investigations have scrutinized the risk factors for MFN development, few have delved into the aftermath, specifically implant failure or salvage. This study seeks to appraise the prognosis of the implanted prosthesis following MFN occurrence, as well as identify predictors of such outcomes.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>Among patients who underwent immediate implant-based reconstruction between 2010 and 2022, individuals with MFN development were identified and scrutinized regarding the fate of their prosthesis (salvaged/failed). Independent risk factors were identified using multivariable analyses and subgroup analyses accounting for diverse clinical settings.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>Among a total of 3128 cases, 422 of MFN (194 partial, 228 full-thickness necrosis) were examined. Of them, 384 prostheses (91%) were salvaged, while 38 (9%) failed. Multivariate analysis revealed predictors of reconstruction failure included nipple-sparing mastectomy, larger skin excision, type of acellular dermal matrix used, previous radiotherapy, and full-thickness necrosis, while operation procedures, including type of operation and plane for prosthesis insertion (prepectoral/subpectoral), showed no significant associations. Risk factors differed by insertion plane, with obesity, larger skin excision, and previous radiation history significant in the prepectoral group, and only MFN degree influencing successful salvage in the subpectoral.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This study sheds light on the importance of understanding the prognosis and potential predictors of implant failure/salvage following MFN, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches to minimize the risk of reconstruction failure.</p><h3>Level of Evidence III</h3><p>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 Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7609,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"volume\":\"49 11\",\"pages\":\"3081 - 3091\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00266-025-04695-1\",\"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":"Aesthetic Plastic Surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00266-025-04695-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在以假体为基础的乳房重建领域,乳房切除术皮瓣坏死(MFN)是一种普遍但严重的并发症,它对植入假体的稳定性构成威胁。尽管许多研究都仔细研究了MFN发展的风险因素,但很少有人深入研究其后果,特别是植入物失败或抢救。本研究旨在评估MFN发生后植入假体的预后,并确定此类结果的预测因素。方法:在2010年至2022年期间接受即刻种植体重建的患者中,鉴定出MFN发育的个体,并仔细检查其假体的命运(抢救/失败)。使用多变量分析和亚组分析确定了独立的危险因素,考虑了不同的临床环境。结果:在3128例MFN中,检查了422例(部分坏死194例,全层坏死228例)。其中修复修复体384例(91%),修复失败38例(9%)。多因素分析显示,重建失败的预测因素包括保留乳头的乳房切除术、更大的皮肤切除术、使用的脱细胞真皮基质类型、既往放疗和全层坏死,而手术方式,包括手术类型和假体插入平面(胸前/胸下),没有显着相关性。危险因素因插入平面而异,在胸前组中肥胖、较大的皮肤切除和既往放射史显著,只有MFN程度影响胸下的成功挽救。结论:本研究揭示了了解MFN后种植体失败/修复的预后和潜在预测因素的重要性,强调需要量身定制的方法来最大限度地降低重建失败的风险。证据等级iii:本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定证据等级。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者说明www.springer.com/00266。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

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
Prognosis of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy Flap Necrosis: Predictors of Failure and Salvage

Background

In the realm of implant-based breast reconstruction, mastectomy flap necrosis (MFN) is a prevalent yet grave complication that poses a threat to the stability of the inserted prosthesis. Although numerous investigations have scrutinized the risk factors for MFN development, few have delved into the aftermath, specifically implant failure or salvage. This study seeks to appraise the prognosis of the implanted prosthesis following MFN occurrence, as well as identify predictors of such outcomes.

Methods

Among patients who underwent immediate implant-based reconstruction between 2010 and 2022, individuals with MFN development were identified and scrutinized regarding the fate of their prosthesis (salvaged/failed). Independent risk factors were identified using multivariable analyses and subgroup analyses accounting for diverse clinical settings.

Results

Among a total of 3128 cases, 422 of MFN (194 partial, 228 full-thickness necrosis) were examined. Of them, 384 prostheses (91%) were salvaged, while 38 (9%) failed. Multivariate analysis revealed predictors of reconstruction failure included nipple-sparing mastectomy, larger skin excision, type of acellular dermal matrix used, previous radiotherapy, and full-thickness necrosis, while operation procedures, including type of operation and plane for prosthesis insertion (prepectoral/subpectoral), showed no significant associations. Risk factors differed by insertion plane, with obesity, larger skin excision, and previous radiation history significant in the prepectoral group, and only MFN degree influencing successful salvage in the subpectoral.

Conclusions

This study sheds light on the importance of understanding the prognosis and potential predictors of implant failure/salvage following MFN, emphasizing the need for tailored approaches to minimize the risk of reconstruction failure.

Level of Evidence III

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 Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

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
4.40
自引率
25.00%
发文量
479
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is a publication of the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and the official journal of the European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery (EASAPS), Società Italiana di Chirurgia Plastica Ricostruttiva ed Estetica (SICPRE), Vereinigung der Deutschen Aesthetisch Plastischen Chirurgen (VDAPC), the Romanian Aesthetic Surgery Society (RASS), Asociación Española de Cirugía Estética Plástica (AECEP), La Sociedad Argentina de Cirugía Plástica, Estética y Reparadora (SACPER), the Rhinoplasty Society of Europe (RSE), the Iranian Society of Plastic and Aesthetic Surgeons (ISPAS), the Singapore Association of Plastic Surgeons (SAPS), the Australasian Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (ASAPS), the Egyptian Society of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (ESPRS), and the Sociedad Chilena de Cirugía Plástica, Reconstructiva y Estética (SCCP). Aesthetic Plastic Surgery provides a forum for original articles advancing the art of aesthetic plastic surgery. Many describe surgical craftsmanship; others deal with complications in surgical procedures and methods by which to treat or avoid them. Coverage includes "second thoughts" on established techniques, which might be abandoned, modified, or improved. Also included are case histories; improvements in surgical instruments, pharmaceuticals, and operating room equipment; and discussions of problems such as the role of psychosocial factors in the doctor-patient and the patient-public interrelationships. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery is covered in Current Contents/Clinical Medicine, SciSearch, Research Alert, Index Medicus-Medline, and Excerpta Medica/Embase.
期刊最新文献
Invited Response on: Combination Therapy Involving Pulsed Dye and Fractional CO2 Laser Followed by Ultrasound-Assisted Transdermal Drug Delivery Technique for Hypertrophic Scars in Pediatric Patients. RealSelf Assessment of Patient Narratives and Drivers of Dissatisfaction Following Augmentation-Mastopexy: A Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis. The Blood Supply of the Lips: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Response to: Comment on "The Effect of Platelet-Rich Fibrin on Block, Crushed and Diced Cartilage". The Revision of Vertical Prolabial Deficiency in Bilateral Cleft Lip Patients: Prolabium Lengthening by Nasolabial Muscle Reconstruction.
×
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学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
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