A Systematic Review and Head-to-Head Meta-Analysis of Outcomes following Direct-to-Implant versus Conventional Two-Stage Implant Reconstruction.

Plastic and reconstructive surgery 2015 Vol.136(6) p. 1135-1144

Basta MN, Gerety PA, Serletti JM, Kovach SJ, Fischer JP

관련 도메인

Abstract

[BACKGROUND] Innovative approaches to reconstruction have ushered in an era of breast reconstruction in which direct-to-implant procedures can provide an immediately reconstructed breast. Balancing the benefits against its technical challenges is vital. The authors evaluated the safety and efficacy of using direct-to-implant versus conventional two-stage reconstruction through a systematic meta-analysis.

[METHODS] A literature search identified all articles published after 1999 involving prosthetic-based breast reconstruction as a two-stage tissue expander/implant or direct-to-implant technique. The primary outcomes of interest, including implant loss, capsular contracture, reoperation, and infection, were analyzed by means of head-to-head meta-analysis.

[RESULTS] Thirteen studies involving 5216 breast reconstructions were included. The average patient age was 47.2 ± 1.0 years, the average body mass index was 24.9 ± 0.8 mg/k2, and the average follow-up was 40.8 months. Wound infection, seroma, and capsular contracture risk were similar between groups. However, direct-to-implant reconstruction was associated with a higher risk for skin flap necrosis (OR, 1.43; p = 0.01; I2 = 51 percent) and reoperation (OR, 1.25; p = 0.04; I2 = 43 percent). Ultimately, the risk for implant loss was nearly two-fold higher with direct-to-implant reconstruction compared with tissue expander/implant reconstruction (OR, 1.87; p = 0.04; I2 = 33 percent).

[CONCLUSIONS] Although direct-to-implant and two-stage tissue expander/implant reconstruction are successful approaches, this meta-analysis demonstrates significantly greater risk of flap necrosis and implant failure with direct-to-implant reconstruction. The authors' findings suggest that the critical component of patient selection is judgment of mastectomy flap tissue quality. These findings can enhance the risk counseling process and highlight the need for additional investigations to optimize outcomes.

추출된 의학 개체 (NER)

유형영어 표현한국어 / 풀이UMLS CUI출처등장
해부 breast 유방 dict 4
시술 flap 피판재건술 dict 3
합병증 flap necrosis 괴사 dict 2
합병증 capsular contracture 피막구축 dict 2
해부 tissue scispacy 1
해부 flap tissue scispacy 1
합병증 seroma 장액종 dict 1
합병증 infection 감염 dict 1
합병증 wound infection 감염 dict 1
합병증 prosthetic-based breast scispacy 1
합병증 Wound scispacy 1
합병증 skin flap scispacy 1
약물 [BACKGROUND] scispacy 1
약물 [CONCLUSIONS] scispacy 1
질환 implant loss scispacy 1
질환 contracture C0009917
Contracture
scispacy 1
질환 necrosis C0027540
Necrosis
scispacy 1
질환 implant failure C0854676
Implant Failure
scispacy 1
기타 capsular scispacy 1
기타 patient scispacy 1
기타 tissue expander/implant scispacy 1

MeSH Terms

Breast Implantation; Comparative Effectiveness Research; Female; Forecasting; Humans; Mammaplasty; Patient Selection; Treatment Outcome

🔗 함께 등장하는 도메인

이 논문이 속한 카테고리와 같은 논문에서 자주 함께 다뤄지는 카테고리들

관련 논문