Buck Donald, Rawlani Vinay, Wayne Jeffrey, Dumanian Gregory A, Mustoe Thomas A, Fine Neil A, Galiano Robert, Kim John Ys
Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA.
Can J Plast Surg. 2012 Spring;20(1):e10-5. doi: 10.1177/229255031202000108.
While studies have compared aesthetic outcomes following wide local excision of head and neck melanoma, none have evaluated this important outcome from the patient's perspective. Indeed, one could argue that the psychosocial impact of head and neck melanoma excision and reconstruction is more accurately assessed by deriving patient-based as opposed to surgeon-based outcome measures.
To evaluate aesthetic outcomes following wide local excision of head and neck melanoma from the patient's perspective.
Fifty-one patients who underwent excision of 57 head and neck melanomas followed by immediate closure by primary repair, skin grafting, local flap coverage or free tissue transfer were asked to complete a written survey at least six months after their surgery. A visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to assess the patient's perception of appearance alteration, satisfaction with his or her appearance, and emotional impairment. An ordinal scale was used to evaluate several criteria of the reconstructive outcome (pain, itching, colour, scarring, stiffness, thickness and irregularity).
Forty-two patients (82.4%) completed the survey. There were significant correlations between VAS scores reported for appearance alteration, satisfaction with outcome and emotional impairment (P=0.001). Patients who received skin grafts reported significantly unfavourable VAS scores compared with other methods of reconstruction (P=0.046). Moreover, skin grafts received significantly worse ordinal scale ratings for itching (P=0.043), colour (P=0.047), scarring (P=0.003) and stiffness (P=0.041) compared with other methods of reconstruction. Both skin grafts and free flaps were reported to have significantly less favourable thickness (P=0.012) and irregularity (P=0.036) than primary closure or local tissue transfer. There was no significant difference between patients undergoing primary closure with local tissue transfer (P>0.413). Other factors related to the patient's VAS scores included location of the melanoma (P=0.033), size of defect (P=0.037) and recurrence of melanoma (P=0.042).
The degree of emotional impairment following reconstruction of head and neck melanoma excision defects was correlated with the patient's perception of appearance alteration. From the patient's perspective, primary closure and local tissue transfer appeared to result in the highest aesthetic satisfaction.
虽然已有研究比较了头颈部黑色素瘤广泛局部切除后的美学效果,但尚无研究从患者角度评估这一重要结果。实际上,可以认为,通过得出基于患者而非基于外科医生的结果指标,能更准确地评估头颈部黑色素瘤切除与重建的心理社会影响。
从患者角度评估头颈部黑色素瘤广泛局部切除后的美学效果。
51例接受57个头颈部黑色素瘤切除手术,随后通过一期缝合、植皮、局部皮瓣覆盖或游离组织移植进行即刻闭合的患者,被要求在术后至少6个月完成一份书面调查问卷。使用视觉模拟量表(VAS)评估患者对外观改变的感知、对自身外观的满意度以及情绪损伤情况。使用有序量表评估重建效果的几个标准(疼痛、瘙痒、颜色、瘢痕、僵硬、厚度和不规则性)。
42例患者(82.4%)完成了调查。报告的外观改变、对结果的满意度和情绪损伤的VAS评分之间存在显著相关性(P = 0.001)。与其他重建方法相比,接受植皮的患者报告的VAS评分明显较差(P = 0.046)。此外,与其他重建方法相比,植皮在瘙痒(P = 0.043)、颜色(P = 0.047)、瘢痕(P = 0.003)和僵硬(P = 0.041)方面的有序量表评分明显更差。据报告,植皮和游离皮瓣的厚度(P = 0.012)和不规则性(P = 0.036)明显不如一期缝合或局部组织移植。接受一期缝合与局部组织移植的患者之间无显著差异(P>0.413)。与患者VAS评分相关 的其他因素包括黑色素瘤的位置(P = 0.033)、缺损大小(P = 0.037)和黑色素瘤复发情况(P = 0.042)。
头颈部黑色素瘤切除缺损重建后的情绪损伤程度与患者对外观改变的感知相关。从患者角度来看,一期缝合和局部组织移植似乎能带来最高的美学满意度。