Wu Yongxiao, Yu Lizhi, Huang Miaoyan, Huang Yanping, Li Chunyan, Liang Yiwen, Liang Weiming, Qin Tian
The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China.
Front Oncol. 2024 Aug 26;14:1439293. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1439293. eCollection 2024.
This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the complications associated with prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared to subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) in patients diagnosed with breast cancer.
A comprehensive search was performed in four databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL, to collect literature published up until December 31, 2024. In addition, we conducted a thorough manual examination of the bibliographies of the identified papers, as well as pertinent reviews and meta-analyses. We conducted a search on three clinical trial registries, namely ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-trials.com, and Umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm. Meta-analyses were conducted on total complications, hematoma, infection, wound healing issues, necrosis, capsular contracture, rippling, animation deformity, and reoperation.
A total of 40 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with SBR, PBR significantly reduced the incidence of animated malformations (OR=0.37, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.70, P=0.003, I ²=12%), but increased the incidence of ripples (OR=2.39, 95% CI: 1.53 to 3.72, P=0.0001, I ²=10%) and seroma (OR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.35, P=0.04, increasing I ²=70%).
Our findings indicate that PBR and SBR have comparable safety profiles, with similar total complication rates. Specifically, PBR is more likely to cause rippling and seroma, whereas SBR is more prone to causing animation deformity.
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024565837, identifier CRD42024565837.
本荟萃分析旨在评估与胸肌下乳房重建（SBR）相比，胸前乳房重建（PBR）在乳腺癌患者中相关的并发症。
在四个数据库中进行了全面检索，包括Medline、Embase、科学网和CENTRAL，以收集截至2024年12月31日发表的文献。此外，我们对已识别论文的参考文献以及相关综述和荟萃分析进行了全面的手动检查。我们在三个临床试验注册库上进行了检索，即ClinicalTrials.gov、Controlled-trials.com和Umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm。对总并发症、血肿、感染、伤口愈合问题、坏死、包膜挛缩、波纹、动态畸形和再次手术进行了荟萃分析。
荟萃分析共纳入40项研究。与SBR相比，PBR显著降低了动态畸形的发生率（OR = 0.37，95% CI：0.19至0.70，P = 0.003，I² = 12%），但增加了波纹（OR = 2.39，95% CI：1.53至3.72，P = 0.0001，I² = 10%）和血清肿（OR = 1.55，95% CI：1.02至2.35，P = 0.04，I²增加 = 70%）的发生率。
我们的研究结果表明，PBR和SBR具有相当的安全性，总并发症发生率相似。具体而言，PBR更易引起波纹和血清肿，而SBR更易导致动态畸形。
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024565837，标识符CRD42024565837。
