Cargando…

Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction

PURPOSE: Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become popular as an effective procedure for patients with early breast cancer. We herein report an overview of the four types of skin incisions used for SSM. METHODS: The records of 111 consecutive breast cancer pa...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kinoshita, Satoki, Kyoda, Shigeya, Hirano, Akio, Akiba, Tadashi, Nojima, Kimihiro, Uchida, Ken, Takeyama, Hiroshi, Morikawa, Toshiaki
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Japan 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4097197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24043394
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00595-013-0722-2
_version_ 1782326197077671936
author Kinoshita, Satoki
Kyoda, Shigeya
Hirano, Akio
Akiba, Tadashi
Nojima, Kimihiro
Uchida, Ken
Takeyama, Hiroshi
Morikawa, Toshiaki
author_facet Kinoshita, Satoki
Kyoda, Shigeya
Hirano, Akio
Akiba, Tadashi
Nojima, Kimihiro
Uchida, Ken
Takeyama, Hiroshi
Morikawa, Toshiaki
author_sort Kinoshita, Satoki
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become popular as an effective procedure for patients with early breast cancer. We herein report an overview of the four types of skin incisions used for SSM. METHODS: The records of 111 consecutive breast cancer patients, who received SSM and IBR from 2003 to 2012, were reviewed retrospectively. Four types of skin incisions were used. Type A was the so-called tennis racquet incision, type B was a periareolar incision and mid-axillary incision, type C was the so-called areola-sparing with mid-axillary incision and type D was a small transverse elliptical incision and transverse axillary incision. RESULTS: Twenty-six type A, 59 type B, 20 type C and six type D incisions were made. The average blood loss and average length of the operation during SSM were not significantly different between the four approaches. The average areolar diameter was 35 mm for type A, B and D incisions, and 45 mm for type C. There was a need for postoperative nipple–areolar complex plasty (NAC-P) in 75 % of the cases following type A, B and D incisions, and 35 % of the cases treated using type C incisions. CONCLUSION: The type C incision is superior with regard to the cost and cosmetic outcomes, because fewer of these patients request postoperative NAC-P.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4097197
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2013
publisher Springer Japan
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-40971972014-07-21 Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction Kinoshita, Satoki Kyoda, Shigeya Hirano, Akio Akiba, Tadashi Nojima, Kimihiro Uchida, Ken Takeyama, Hiroshi Morikawa, Toshiaki Surg Today Original Article PURPOSE: Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has become popular as an effective procedure for patients with early breast cancer. We herein report an overview of the four types of skin incisions used for SSM. METHODS: The records of 111 consecutive breast cancer patients, who received SSM and IBR from 2003 to 2012, were reviewed retrospectively. Four types of skin incisions were used. Type A was the so-called tennis racquet incision, type B was a periareolar incision and mid-axillary incision, type C was the so-called areola-sparing with mid-axillary incision and type D was a small transverse elliptical incision and transverse axillary incision. RESULTS: Twenty-six type A, 59 type B, 20 type C and six type D incisions were made. The average blood loss and average length of the operation during SSM were not significantly different between the four approaches. The average areolar diameter was 35 mm for type A, B and D incisions, and 45 mm for type C. There was a need for postoperative nipple–areolar complex plasty (NAC-P) in 75 % of the cases following type A, B and D incisions, and 35 % of the cases treated using type C incisions. CONCLUSION: The type C incision is superior with regard to the cost and cosmetic outcomes, because fewer of these patients request postoperative NAC-P. Springer Japan 2013-09-17 2014 /pmc/articles/PMC4097197/ /pubmed/24043394 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00595-013-0722-2 Text en © The Author(s) 2013 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/ Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License which permits any use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and the source are credited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Kinoshita, Satoki
Kyoda, Shigeya
Hirano, Akio
Akiba, Tadashi
Nojima, Kimihiro
Uchida, Ken
Takeyama, Hiroshi
Morikawa, Toshiaki
Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title_full Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title_fullStr Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title_short Clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
title_sort clinical comparison of four types of skin incisions for skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4097197/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24043394
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00595-013-0722-2
work_keys_str_mv AT kinoshitasatoki clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT kyodashigeya clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT hiranoakio clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT akibatadashi clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT nojimakimihiro clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT uchidaken clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT takeyamahiroshi clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction
AT morikawatoshiaki clinicalcomparisonoffourtypesofskinincisionsforskinsparingmastectomyandimmediatebreastreconstruction