Kim Min Ji, Lee Dong Hwan, Park Dong Ha
Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ajou University School of Medicine, Suwon, Korea.
Arch Plast Surg. 2020 Nov;47(6):551-558. doi: 10.5999/aps.2020.01494. Epub 2020 Nov 15.
Giant congenital melanocytic nevus (GCMN) is a rare disease, for which complete surgical resection is recommended. However, the size of the lesions presents problems for the management of the condition. The most popular approach is to use a tissue expander; however, single-stage expansion in reconstructive surgery for GCMN cannot always address the entire defect. Few reports have compared tissue expansion techniques. The present study compared single and serial expansion to analyze the risk factors for complications and the surgical outcomes of the two techniques.
We retrospectively reviewed the medical charts of patients who underwent tissue expander reconstruction between March 2011 and July 2019. Serial expansion was indicated in cases of anatomically obvious defects after the first expansion, limited skin expansion with two more expander insertions, or capsular contracture after removal of the first expander.
Fifty-five patients (88 cases) were analyzed, of whom 31 underwent serial expansion. The number of expanders inserted was higher in the serial-expansion group (P<0.001). The back and lower extremities were the most common locations for single and serial expansion, respectively (P=0.043). Multivariate analysis showed that sex (odds ratio [OR], 0.257; P=0.015), expander size (OR, 1.016; P=0.015), and inflation volume (OR, 0.987; P=0.015) were risk factors for complications.
Serial expansion is a good option for GCMN management. We demonstrated that large-sized expanders and large inflation volumes can lead to complications, and therefore require risk-reducing strategies. Nonetheless, serial expansion with proper management is appropriate for certain patients and can provide aesthetically satisfactory outcomes.
巨大先天性黑素细胞痣(GCMN)是一种罕见疾病,建议进行完整手术切除。然而,病变大小给该病的治疗带来了问题。最常用的方法是使用组织扩张器;然而,GCMN重建手术中的单阶段扩张并不能总是解决整个缺损问题。很少有报告比较组织扩张技术。本研究比较了单次扩张和连续扩张,以分析两种技术并发症的危险因素和手术结果。
我们回顾性分析了2011年3月至2019年7月间接受组织扩张器重建手术患者的病历。在首次扩张后解剖学上明显缺损、通过再插入两个扩张器进行有限皮肤扩张或首次扩张器取出后出现包膜挛缩的病例中采用连续扩张。
分析了55例患者(88例次),其中31例接受了连续扩张。连续扩张组插入的扩张器数量更多(P<0.001)。单次扩张和连续扩张最常见的部位分别是背部和下肢(P=0.043)。多因素分析显示,性别(比值比[OR],0.257;P=0.015)、扩张器大小(OR,1.016;P=0.015)和注水量(OR,0.987;P=0.015)是并发症的危险因素。
连续扩张是GCMN治疗的一个好选择。我们证明,大型扩张器和大量注水量会导致并发症,因此需要采取降低风险的策略。尽管如此,对于某些患者,适当管理下的连续扩张是合适的,并且可以提供美学上令人满意的结果。