Fischer Sebastian, Diehm Yannick F, Kotsougiani-Fischer Dimitra, Gazyakan Emre, Radu Christian A, Kremer Thomas, Hirche Christoph, Kneser Ulrich
Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Burn Center, Hand and Plastic Surgery of Heidelberg University, BG Clinic Ludwigshafen, Ludwig-Guttmann-Str. 13, 67071 Ludwigshafen, Germany.
J Clin Med. 2021 Dec 14;10(24):5875. doi: 10.3390/jcm10245875.
Microsurgical breast reconstruction demands the highest level of expertise in both reconstructive and aesthetic plastic surgery. Implementation of such a complex surgical procedure is generally associated with a learning curve defined by higher complication rates at the beginning. The aim of this study was to present an approach for teaching deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) and transverse upper gracilis (TUG) flap breast reconstruction, which can diminish complications and provide satisfying outcomes from the beginning. DIEP and TUG flap procedures for breast reconstruction were either performed by a senior surgeon (>200 DIEP/TUG, " "), or taught to one of five trainees (>80 breast surgeries; >50 free flaps) in a step-wise approach. The latter were either performed by the senior surgeon, and a trainee was assisting the surgery (""); by the trainee, and a senior surgeon was supervising (""); or by the trainee without a senior surgeon (""). Surgeries of each group were analyzed regarding OR-time, complications, and refinement procedures. A total of 95 DIEP and 93 TUG flaps were included into this study. Before the first DIEP/TUG flap without supervision, each trainee underwent a mean of 6.8 DIEP and 7.3 TUG training surgeries ( > 0.05). Outcome measures did not reveal any statistically significant differences (passive training/active training/after training/no-training: OR-time (min): DIEP: 331/351/338/304 ( > 0.05); TUG: 229/214/239/217 ( > 0.05); complications (n): DIEP: 6/13/16/11 ( > 0.05); TUG: 6/19/23/11 ( > 0.05); refinement procedures (n): DIEP:71/63/49/44 ( > 0.05); TUG: 65/41/36/56 ( > 0.05)), indicating safe and secure implementation of this step-wise training approach for microsurgical breast reconstruction in both aesthetic and reconstructive measures. Of note, despite being a perforator flap, DIEP flap required no more training than TUG flap, highlighting the importance of flap inset at the recipient site.
显微外科乳房重建需要在重建整形外科和美容整形外科方面具备最高水平的专业知识。实施这样一个复杂的外科手术通常伴随着一条学习曲线,其特点是在开始时并发症发生率较高。本研究的目的是提出一种用于教授腹壁下深动脉穿支(DIEP)皮瓣和股薄肌横行皮瓣(TUG)乳房重建的方法,该方法可以减少并发症并从一开始就提供令人满意的效果。用于乳房重建的DIEP和TUG皮瓣手术要么由一位资深外科医生(>200例DIEP/TUG手术,“ ”)进行,要么以逐步的方式教授给五名学员之一(>80例乳房手术;>50例游离皮瓣手术)。后者的手术要么由资深外科医生进行,学员协助手术(“”);要么由学员进行,资深外科医生监督(“”);要么由学员在没有资深外科医生的情况下进行(“”)。对每组手术的手术时间、并发症和修复手术进行了分析。本研究共纳入95例DIEP皮瓣和93例TUG皮瓣。在第一次无监督的DIEP/TUG皮瓣手术之前,每位学员平均接受了6.8例DIEP和7.3例TUG训练手术(>0.05)。结果指标未显示任何统计学上的显著差异(被动训练/主动训练/训练后/未训练:手术时间(分钟):DIEP:331/351/338/304(>0.05);TUG:229/214/239/217(>0.05);并发症(例):DIEP:6/13/16/11(>0.05);TUG:6/19/23/11(>0.05);修复手术(例):DIEP:71/63/49/44(>0.05);TUG:65/41/36/56(>0.05)),表明这种用于显微外科乳房重建的逐步训练方法在美学和重建措施方面都能安全可靠地实施。值得注意的是,尽管DIEP皮瓣是穿支皮瓣,但它所需的训练并不比TUG皮瓣多,这突出了皮瓣在受区植入的重要性。