美学评价与验证:DIEP皮瓣后脐部重建。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 SURGERY Journal of reconstructive microsurgery Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-07 DOI:10.1055/a-2205-2337
Nicholas T Haddock, Cyrus Steppe, Sumeet S Teotia
{"title":"美学评价与验证:DIEP皮瓣后脐部重建。","authors":"Nicholas T Haddock, Cyrus Steppe, Sumeet S Teotia","doi":"10.1055/a-2205-2337","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The most common method for autologous breast reconstruction is the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The umbilicus can be managed in various ways, including re-inset, neoumbilicus, and umbilectomy without reconstruction. This study evaluated the aesthetic differences in umbilicus reconstruction choice and variation in patients' postoperative satisfaction with their abdomen.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A retrospective review of 1,019 patients treated with DIEP flap breast reconstruction between August 2009 and January 2022 was conducted. Patients were stratified by management of the umbilicus: preservation and re-inset of the native umbilicus, umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction, and umbilectomy with no reconstruction. A crowdsourced survey was created to assess the aesthetic preference of each photograph using a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> There were 1,063 responses to the umbilicus preference crowd source survey. Patients who had delayed umbilicus reconstruction after umbilectomy were rated to be significantly more attractive (4.397 ± 1.697) than both preservation of the native umbilicus (4.176 ± 1.669) and lack of the umbilicus (3.994 ± 1.733; <i>p</i> < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In an analysis of the BREAST-Q scores, delayed reconstruction patients had a similar change across measures when compared to the re-inset group. The delayed group had a significantly higher change in overall satisfaction and well-being with abdomen when compared with the no reconstruction group (<i>p</i> = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> This study demonstrates that umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction yields a significantly higher aesthetic rating and comparable patient satisfaction when compared to re-inset of the umbilicus.</p>","PeriodicalId":16949,"journal":{"name":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","volume":" ","pages":"443-451"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Aesthetic Evaluation and Validation: Umbilicus Reconstruction after DIEP Flap.\",\"authors\":\"Nicholas T Haddock, Cyrus Steppe, Sumeet S Teotia\",\"doi\":\"10.1055/a-2205-2337\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong> The most common method for autologous breast reconstruction is the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The umbilicus can be managed in various ways, including re-inset, neoumbilicus, and umbilectomy without reconstruction. This study evaluated the aesthetic differences in umbilicus reconstruction choice and variation in patients' postoperative satisfaction with their abdomen.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong> A retrospective review of 1,019 patients treated with DIEP flap breast reconstruction between August 2009 and January 2022 was conducted. Patients were stratified by management of the umbilicus: preservation and re-inset of the native umbilicus, umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction, and umbilectomy with no reconstruction. A crowdsourced survey was created to assess the aesthetic preference of each photograph using a Likert scale.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong> There were 1,063 responses to the umbilicus preference crowd source survey. Patients who had delayed umbilicus reconstruction after umbilectomy were rated to be significantly more attractive (4.397 ± 1.697) than both preservation of the native umbilicus (4.176 ± 1.669) and lack of the umbilicus (3.994 ± 1.733; <i>p</i> < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In an analysis of the BREAST-Q scores, delayed reconstruction patients had a similar change across measures when compared to the re-inset group. The delayed group had a significantly higher change in overall satisfaction and well-being with abdomen when compared with the no reconstruction group (<i>p</i> = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong> This study demonstrates that umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction yields a significantly higher aesthetic rating and comparable patient satisfaction when compared to re-inset of the umbilicus.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16949,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"443-451\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2205-2337\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/7 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SURGERY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of reconstructive microsurgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2205-2337","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/7 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:自体乳房重建最常见的方法是上腹部下穿支(DIEP)皮瓣。脐部可以通过多种方式进行管理,包括重新插入、新脐部和无需重建的脐部切除术。本研究评估了脐部重建选择的美学差异以及患者对腹部术后满意度的变化。方法:对2009年8月至2022年1月期间接受DIEP皮瓣乳房重建的1019例患者进行回顾性分析。根据脐部的处理对患者进行分层:保留和重新植入自体脐部,延迟重建的脐部切除术和不重建的脐部分切除术。创建了一项众包调查,使用Likert量表评估每张照片的审美偏好。结果:共有1063份对脐偏好众包调查的回复。与保留天然脐(4.176±1.669)和无脐(3.994±1.733)(分别为p<0.001和p<0.001)相比,切除脐后延迟重建脐的患者被评为更有吸引力(4.397±1.697)。在对Breast-Q评分的分析中,与重新插入组相比,延迟重建患者的各项指标发生了类似的变化。与未重建组相比,延迟重建组对腹部的总体满意度和幸福感的变化显著更高(分别为p=0.006和p=0.027)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Aesthetic Evaluation and Validation: Umbilicus Reconstruction after DIEP Flap.

Background:  The most common method for autologous breast reconstruction is the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The umbilicus can be managed in various ways, including re-inset, neoumbilicus, and umbilectomy without reconstruction. This study evaluated the aesthetic differences in umbilicus reconstruction choice and variation in patients' postoperative satisfaction with their abdomen.

Methods:  A retrospective review of 1,019 patients treated with DIEP flap breast reconstruction between August 2009 and January 2022 was conducted. Patients were stratified by management of the umbilicus: preservation and re-inset of the native umbilicus, umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction, and umbilectomy with no reconstruction. A crowdsourced survey was created to assess the aesthetic preference of each photograph using a Likert scale.

Results:  There were 1,063 responses to the umbilicus preference crowd source survey. Patients who had delayed umbilicus reconstruction after umbilectomy were rated to be significantly more attractive (4.397 ± 1.697) than both preservation of the native umbilicus (4.176 ± 1.669) and lack of the umbilicus (3.994 ± 1.733; p < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In an analysis of the BREAST-Q scores, delayed reconstruction patients had a similar change across measures when compared to the re-inset group. The delayed group had a significantly higher change in overall satisfaction and well-being with abdomen when compared with the no reconstruction group (p = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively).

Conclusion:  This study demonstrates that umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction yields a significantly higher aesthetic rating and comparable patient satisfaction when compared to re-inset of the umbilicus.

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
4.50
自引率
28.60%
发文量
80
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery is a peer-reviewed, indexed journal that provides an international forum for the publication of articles focusing on reconstructive microsurgery and complex reconstructive surgery. The journal was originally established in 1984 for the microsurgical community to publish and share academic papers. The Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery provides the latest in original research spanning basic laboratory, translational, and clinical investigations. Review papers cover current topics in complex reconstruction and microsurgery. In addition, special sections discuss new technologies, innovations, materials, and significant problem cases. The journal welcomes controversial topics, editorial comments, book reviews, and letters to the Editor, in order to complete the balanced spectrum of information available in the Journal of Reconstructive Microsurgery. All articles undergo stringent peer review by international experts in the specialty.
期刊最新文献
Free Fasciocutaneous versus Muscle Flaps in Lower Extremity Reconstruction: Implications for Functionality and Quality of Life. Utilizing Perforator Propeller Flaps for Donor Site Closure: Harvesting Large Workhorse Flaps without Lingering Concerns. Oncoplastic Surgery with Volume Replacement versus Mastectomy with Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Early Postoperative Complications in Patients with Breast Cancer. Effect of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery in Morbidly Obese Patients Undergoing Free Flap Breast Reconstruction. The Vascular Anatomy and Harvesting of the Lateral Femoral Condyle Flap in Pigs.
×
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