Stevens W Grant, Stoker David A, Freeman Mark E, Quardt Suzanne M, Hirsch Elliot M, Cohen Robert
Aesthet Surg J. 2006 Nov-Dec;26(6):674-81. doi: 10.1016/j.asj.2006.10.003.
Although some authors have reported that 1-stage breast augmentation with mastopexy does not increase the risks of surgery, recent literature has raised the question of whether better results might be achieved by staging the procedures.
The authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of 1-stage breast augmentation with mastopexy in their own patients by analyzing long-term complication and revision rates.
A retrospective chart review was performed of 186 consecutive patients who underwent primary 1-stage breast augmentation with mastopexy at a single outpatient facility. Patient data recorded included age, body mass index, smoking status, degree of breast ptosis, and any preoperative asymmetry. Operation-related data recorded included type of mastopexy performed, operating surgeon, length of surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists level, and concomitant procedures. Data on implant type, volume, and position were also collected. Complication and revision rates were recorded and calculated.
Ninety-six patients (44%) received saline implants; 104 (56%) received silicone implants. In most cases, textured implants were placed in submuscular pockets. The mean implant volume was 320 cc. Inverted T mastopexy was performed in 60% of cases, circumareolar in 24% of cases, and vertical or crescent accounted for most of the remainder. No severe complications occurred, although 1 patient developed a late infection that required removal of the breast implant. The most common complication was saline implant deflation (5.9%), although saline implants were used in less than half of cases. Thirty-one patients (16.7%) underwent some form of revision surgery within the average 42-month follow-up period.
Our review of 1-stage breast augmentation with mastopexy procedures revealed no severe complications. Although the overall revision rate of 16.7% is significant, it is comparable to rates for breast augmentation alone and is significantly lower than the 100% reoperation rate required for a staged procedure. In our experience, it is a safe and effective procedure, although one that is not easy to perform. Patients should be advised of the possibility that a second procedure may be necessary.
尽管一些作者报道一期隆乳术联合乳房上提术不会增加手术风险,但最近的文献提出了分期手术是否能取得更好效果的问题。
作者通过分析长期并发症和修复率,评估了一期隆乳术联合乳房上提术在其自身患者中的安全性和有效性。
对在单一门诊机构接受一期隆乳术联合乳房上提术的186例连续患者进行回顾性病历审查。记录的患者数据包括年龄、体重指数、吸烟状况、乳房下垂程度以及任何术前不对称情况。记录的手术相关数据包括所施行的乳房上提术类型、手术医生、手术时长、美国麻醉医师协会分级以及同期手术。还收集了植入物类型、体积和位置的数据。记录并计算并发症和修复率。
96例患者(44%)接受了盐水植入物;104例(56%)接受了硅胶植入物。在大多数情况下,有纹理的植入物被放置在胸大肌下间隙。植入物平均体积为320立方厘米。60%的病例施行倒T形乳房上提术,24%的病例施行乳晕周围乳房上提术,其余大部分病例为垂直或新月形乳房上提术。未发生严重并发症,不过有1例患者发生晚期感染,需要取出乳房植入物。最常见的并发症是盐水植入物瘪陷(5.9%),尽管使用盐水植入物的病例不到一半。在平均42个月的随访期内,31例患者(16.7%)接受了某种形式的修复手术。
我们对一期隆乳术联合乳房上提术的审查未发现严重并发症。尽管16.7%的总体修复率较高,但与单纯隆乳术的修复率相当,且显著低于分期手术所需的100%再次手术率。根据我们的经验,这是一种安全有效的手术,尽管操作并不容易。应告知患者可能需要进行二次手术的可能性。