Putra Teuku Nanda, Sayudo Iqbal Farhan, Rizal Syamsul, Amirsyah Mirnasari, Ikhsan Muhammad, Wulandari Pratidina, Muzammil Emil, Kirana Damar Dita, Nurjannah Nurjannah, Budiman Budiman
Plastic Surgeon from the Beyoutiful Aesthetic Centre, Tangerang Selatan, Indonesia.
Medical doctor from the Medical Research Unit, Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh, Indonesia.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2025 Sep 2. doi: 10.1007/s00266-025-05181-4.
Endoscopic-assisted transaxillary dual-plane augmentation mammaplasty is favored for its aesthetic advantages and minimal visible scarring. However, the optimal dissection tool between harmonic scalpel (HS) or monopolar electrotome (ME) remains debated due to limited comparative data.
A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted by searching PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies comparing HS and ME in endoscopic-assisted transaxillary dual-plane augmentation mammaplasty. Data synthesis was performed using Review Manager 5.4 with random-effects models. Clinical outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MD) or odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I statistic.
Four studies comprising 390 participants met the inclusion criteria. HS significantly reduced total drainage volume (MD -113.40 mL; 95% CI -133.82 to -92.97; I = 10%), duration of drainage (MD -1.34 days; 95% CI -1.69 to -0.98; I = 64%), VAS pain scores within the first 24 hours (MD -2.25; 95% CI -3.53 to -0.98; I = 94%), and hospital stay (MD -1.90 days; 95% CI -3.90 to -0.71; I = 89%) compared to ME. Differences in operative time and bleeding were not statistically significant.
HS offers superior outcomes over ME in terms of drainage, pain control, and hospitalization following endoscopic-assisted transaxillary dual-plane augmentation mammaplasty. These findings support the preferential use of HS, though larger, high-quality trials are warranted. Trial Registry The study protocol was prospectively registered on PROSPERO (CRD42025639891).
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
内镜辅助经腋窝双平面隆乳术因其美学优势和最小可见瘢痕而受到青睐。然而,由于比较数据有限,谐波手术刀(HS)或单极电刀(ME)之间的最佳解剖工具仍存在争议。
通过检索PubMed、Embase和Cochrane图书馆,对在内镜辅助经腋窝双平面隆乳术中比较HS和ME的研究进行系统评价和荟萃分析。使用Review Manager 5.4和随机效应模型进行数据合成。临床结局合并为平均差(MD)或比值比(OR),并给出95%置信区间(CI)。使用I统计量评估异质性。
四项研究共390名参与者符合纳入标准。与ME相比,HS显著减少了总引流量(MD -113.40 mL;95% CI -133.82至-92.97;I = 10%)、引流持续时间(MD -1.34天;95% CI -1.69至-0.98;I = 64%)、术后24小时内的视觉模拟评分(VAS)疼痛评分(MD -2.25;95% CI -3.53至-0.98;I = 94%)以及住院时间(MD -1.90天;95% CI -3.90至-0.71;I = 89%)。手术时间和出血量的差异无统计学意义。
在内镜辅助经腋窝双平面隆乳术后的引流、疼痛控制和住院方面,HS比ME具有更好的效果。这些发现支持优先使用HS,尽管需要更大规模、高质量的试验。试验注册 该研究方案已在PROSPERO(CRD42025639891)上进行前瞻性注册。
证据级别 II:本杂志要求作者为每篇文章指定证据级别。有关这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或作者在线指南www.springer.com/00266 。