Villanueva Karie, Patel Harsh, Ghosh Durga, Klomhaus Alexandra, Slack Ginger, Festekjian Jaco, Da Lio Andrew, Tseng Charles
From the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of California, Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, Los Angeles, Calif.
Los Angeles David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles, Calif.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2024 Jun 10;12(6):e5880. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005880. eCollection 2024 Jun.
Prepectoral implant placement continues to gain widespread acceptance as a safe and effective option for breast reconstruction. Current literature demonstrates comparable rates of complications and revisions between prepectoral and subpectoral placement; however, these studies are underpowered and lack long-term follow-up.
We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent immediate two-staged tissue expander or direct-to-implant breast reconstruction at a single center from January 2017 to March 2021. Cases were divided into prepectoral and subpectoral cohorts. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications, aesthetic deformities, and secondary revisions. Descriptive statistics and multivariable regression models were performed to compare the demographic characteristics and outcomes between the two cohorts.
We identified 996 breasts (570 patients), which were divided into prepectoral (391 breasts) and subpectoral (605 breasts) cohorts. There was a higher rate of complications ( < 0.001) and aesthetic deformities ( = 0.02) with prepectoral breast reconstruction. Secondary revisions were comparable between the two cohorts. Multivariable regression analysis confirmed that prepectoral reconstruction was associated with an increased risk of complications (odds ratio 2.39, < 0.001) and aesthetic deformities (odds ratio 1.62, = 0.003).
This study evaluated outcomes in patients undergoing prepectoral or subpectoral breast reconstruction from a single center with long-term follow-up. Prepectoral placement was shown to have an inferior complication and aesthetic profile compared with subpectoral placement, with no difference in secondary revisions. These findings require validation with a well-designed randomized controlled trial to establish best practice for implant-based breast reconstruction.
胸前植入物放置作为一种安全有效的乳房重建选择,越来越被广泛接受。当前文献表明,胸前放置和胸肌下放置的并发症发生率和翻修率相当;然而,这些研究样本量不足且缺乏长期随访。
我们对2017年1月至2021年3月在单一中心接受即刻两阶段组织扩张器或直接植入式乳房重建的患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究。病例分为胸前组和胸肌下组。主要结局指标为术后并发症、美学畸形和二次翻修。进行描述性统计和多变量回归模型,以比较两组之间的人口统计学特征和结局。
我们纳入了996例乳房(570例患者),分为胸前组(391例乳房)和胸肌下组(605例乳房)。胸前乳房重建的并发症发生率更高(<0.001),美学畸形发生率更高(=0.02)。两组之间的二次翻修情况相当。多变量回归分析证实,胸前重建与并发症风险增加(比值比2.39,<0.001)和美学畸形风险增加(比值比1.62,=0.003)相关。
本研究评估了在单一中心接受胸前或胸肌下乳房重建并进行长期随访的患者的结局。结果显示,与胸肌下放置相比,胸前放置的并发症和美学效果较差,二次翻修无差异。这些发现需要通过精心设计的随机对照试验进行验证,以确立基于植入物的乳房重建的最佳实践。