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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |