Department of Clinical Sciences in Malmö, Lund University.
Department of Reconstructive Plastic Surgery, Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden.
J Plast Surg Hand Surg. 2023 Sep 22;58:101-109. doi: 10.2340/jphs.v58.13477.
Breast reconstruction is a given choice for many women following mastectomy. There are a multitude of methods available today, and thus, comparative studies are essential to match patients with suitable methods. The aim of this study was to compare 5-year outcomes following delayed breast reconstruction with expander prosthesis (EP) and with deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. Seventy-three patients, previously randomised to either a permanent EP or a DIEP flap breast reconstruction, were invited for a 5-year follow-up. Assessments included symmetry measurements, breast sensibility with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments and patient-reported outcome (PRO) with the BREAST-Q. Complications within the first 5 postoperative years were recorded. Additionally, BREAST-Q questionnaires were collected from non-randomised patients with an EP breast reconstruction. Between 2019 and 2022, 65 patients completed the follow-ups. Symmetry and PRO were significantly higher in the DIEP flap group. However, EP-reconstructed breasts were significantly more sensate and demonstrated areas with protective sensibility, unlike the DIEP flap breasts. The overall complication rates were comparable between the two groups (p = 0.27). Regression analysis identified body mass index as a risk factor for reoperation in general anaesthesia and for wound infection. No significant differences were found in a comparison of the randomised and the non-randomised EP groups' BREAST-Q results. This randomised 5-year follow-up study found PRO to be favourable following a DIEP flap reconstruction and sensibility to be better in EP reconstructions. The complication rates were comparable; however, longer follow-ups are warranted to cover the complete lifespans of the two breast reconstruction methods.
乳房重建是许多接受乳房切除术的女性的首选。目前有多种方法可供选择,因此,比较研究对于将患者与合适的方法相匹配至关重要。本研究旨在比较延迟性乳房重建中应用扩张器假体(EP)和腹壁下动脉穿支皮瓣(DIEP)的 5 年结果。73 名先前随机分配至永久性 EP 或 DIEP 皮瓣乳房重建的患者被邀请进行 5 年随访。评估包括对称性测量、Semmes-Weinstein 单丝测定的乳房敏感性和患者报告的结果(PRO),使用 BREAST-Q 进行评估。记录了术后 5 年内的并发症。此外,还从接受 EP 乳房重建的非随机患者中收集了 BREAST-Q 问卷。在 2019 年至 2022 年期间,有 65 名患者完成了随访。DIEP 皮瓣组的对称性和 PRO 显著更高。然而,EP 重建的乳房明显更敏感,并表现出具有保护敏感性的区域,这与 DIEP 皮瓣乳房不同。两组的总体并发症发生率相当(p = 0.27)。回归分析确定体重指数是全身麻醉下再次手术和伤口感染的危险因素。随机和非随机 EP 组的 BREAST-Q 结果比较没有发现显著差异。这项随机 5 年随访研究发现,DIEP 皮瓣重建后的 PRO 更优,EP 重建的乳房敏感性更好。并发症发生率相当;然而,需要更长时间的随访来涵盖两种乳房重建方法的完整寿命。