본문으로 건너뛰기
← 뒤로

Antimicrobial Irrigation and Technique during Breast Augmentation: Survey of Current Practice.

Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open 2019 Vol.7(8) p. e2310

Epps MT, Langsdon S, Pels TK, Lee TM, Thurston T, Brzezienski MA

관련 도메인

이 논문을 인용하기

BibTeX ↓ RIS ↓
APA Epps MT, Langsdon S, et al. (2019). Antimicrobial Irrigation and Technique during Breast Augmentation: Survey of Current Practice.. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, 7(8), e2310. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002310
MLA Epps MT, et al.. "Antimicrobial Irrigation and Technique during Breast Augmentation: Survey of Current Practice.." Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open, vol. 7, no. 8, 2019, pp. e2310.
PMID 31592371

Abstract

[UNLABELLED] Breast augmentation is among the most common procedures performed in the United States. Though bacterial contamination of breast prostheses is associated with adverse sequelae, there are no universally accepted guidelines and limited best practice recommendations for antimicrobial breast pocket irrigation. We designed a survey to identify pocket irrigation preferences and antimicrobial techniques during implant-based breast augmentation among American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) members.

[METHODS] In January 2018, a random cohort of 2,488 ASPS members was surveyed. Questions queried breast pocket irrigation methods and surgical techniques including implant placement, incision location, and implant soaking agents. An extensive literature review of breast pocket irrigation practices was completed and used as a basis for the survey.

[RESULTS] The survey response rate was above the ASPS average at 16% (n = 407). Respondents preferred an inframammary incision (90%) and submuscular implant placement (92%). Triple antibiotic solution (TAS) and TAS + Betadine ± Bacitracin were preferred by 61% and Betadine variants by 11%. Preferred dwell times stratified to 30 seconds (39%), 1 minute (18%), 2-5 minutes (21%), and >5 minutes (22%). Among those employing a TAS variant, 53% preferred a suboptimal dwell time of ≤1 minute. Prostheses were soaked in TAS (42%), TAS + Betadine ± Bacitracin (15%), a Betadine variant (12%), or other (31%).

[CONCLUSIONS] Periprosthetic bacterial contamination leads to comorbidity following breast augmentation. Our results reveal significant variability regarding breast pocket irrigation techniques among ASPS members during cosmetic breast augmentation. These data suggest the need for best practice guidelines regarding breast pocket irrigation and implant soaking agents.

추출된 의학 개체 (NER)

유형영어 표현한국어 / 풀이UMLS CUI출처등장
해부 breast 유방 dict 11
시술 breast augmentation 유방성형술 dict 5
해부 inframammary scispacy 1
합병증 breast pocket scispacy 1
약물 Bacitracin C0004599
bacitracin
scispacy 1
약물 TAS + scispacy 1
약물 Betadine scispacy 1
약물 [CONCLUSIONS] Periprosthetic bacterial scispacy 1
기법 submuscular 근막하 평면 dict 1
질환 adverse sequelae scispacy 1
질환 ASPS → American Society of Plastic Surgeons scispacy 1
질환 comorbidity C0009488
Comorbidity
scispacy 1
질환 cosmetic breast augmentation scispacy 1
질환 breast prostheses scispacy 1

🔗 함께 등장하는 도메인

이 논문이 속한 카테고리와 같은 논문에서 자주 함께 다뤄지는 카테고리들

같은 제1저자의 인용 많은 논문 (1)

관련 논문