Cargando…
Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study
Microsurgical breast reconstruction demands the highest level of expertise in both reconstructive and aesthetic plastic surgery. Implementation of such a complex surgical procedure is generally associated with a learning curve defined by higher complication rates at the beginning. The aim of this st...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8707719/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34945171 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10245875 |
_version_ | 1784622505048145920 |
---|---|
author | Fischer, Sebastian Diehm, Yannick F. Kotsougiani-Fischer, Dimitra Gazyakan, Emre Radu, Christian A. Kremer, Thomas Hirche, Christoph Kneser, Ulrich |
author_facet | Fischer, Sebastian Diehm, Yannick F. Kotsougiani-Fischer, Dimitra Gazyakan, Emre Radu, Christian A. Kremer, Thomas Hirche, Christoph Kneser, Ulrich |
author_sort | Fischer, Sebastian |
collection | PubMed |
description | Microsurgical breast reconstruction demands the highest level of expertise in both reconstructive and aesthetic plastic surgery. Implementation of such a complex surgical procedure is generally associated with a learning curve defined by higher complication rates at the beginning. The aim of this study was to present an approach for teaching deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) and transverse upper gracilis (TUG) flap breast reconstruction, which can diminish complications and provide satisfying outcomes from the beginning. DIEP and TUG flap procedures for breast reconstruction were either performed by a senior surgeon (>200 DIEP/TUG, ”no-training group”), or taught to one of five trainees (>80 breast surgeries; >50 free flaps) in a step-wise approach. The latter were either performed by the senior surgeon, and a trainee was assisting the surgery (“passive training”); by the trainee, and a senior surgeon was supervising (“active training”); or by the trainee without a senior surgeon (“after training”). Surgeries of each group were analyzed regarding OR-time, complications, and refinement procedures. A total of 95 DIEP and 93 TUG flaps were included into this study. Before the first DIEP/TUG flap without supervision, each trainee underwent a mean of 6.8 DIEP and 7.3 TUG training surgeries (p > 0.05). Outcome measures did not reveal any statistically significant differences (passive training/active training/after training/no-training: OR-time (min): DIEP: 331/351/338/304 (p > 0.05); TUG: 229/214/239/217 (p > 0.05); complications (n): DIEP: 6/13/16/11 (p > 0.05); TUG: 6/19/23/11 (p > 0.05); refinement procedures (n): DIEP:71/63/49/44 (p > 0.05); TUG: 65/41/36/56 (p > 0.05)), indicating safe and secure implementation of this step-wise training approach for microsurgical breast reconstruction in both aesthetic and reconstructive measures. Of note, despite being a perforator flap, DIEP flap required no more training than TUG flap, highlighting the importance of flap inset at the recipient site. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8707719 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-87077192021-12-25 Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study Fischer, Sebastian Diehm, Yannick F. Kotsougiani-Fischer, Dimitra Gazyakan, Emre Radu, Christian A. Kremer, Thomas Hirche, Christoph Kneser, Ulrich J Clin Med Article Microsurgical breast reconstruction demands the highest level of expertise in both reconstructive and aesthetic plastic surgery. Implementation of such a complex surgical procedure is generally associated with a learning curve defined by higher complication rates at the beginning. The aim of this study was to present an approach for teaching deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) and transverse upper gracilis (TUG) flap breast reconstruction, which can diminish complications and provide satisfying outcomes from the beginning. DIEP and TUG flap procedures for breast reconstruction were either performed by a senior surgeon (>200 DIEP/TUG, ”no-training group”), or taught to one of five trainees (>80 breast surgeries; >50 free flaps) in a step-wise approach. The latter were either performed by the senior surgeon, and a trainee was assisting the surgery (“passive training”); by the trainee, and a senior surgeon was supervising (“active training”); or by the trainee without a senior surgeon (“after training”). Surgeries of each group were analyzed regarding OR-time, complications, and refinement procedures. A total of 95 DIEP and 93 TUG flaps were included into this study. Before the first DIEP/TUG flap without supervision, each trainee underwent a mean of 6.8 DIEP and 7.3 TUG training surgeries (p > 0.05). Outcome measures did not reveal any statistically significant differences (passive training/active training/after training/no-training: OR-time (min): DIEP: 331/351/338/304 (p > 0.05); TUG: 229/214/239/217 (p > 0.05); complications (n): DIEP: 6/13/16/11 (p > 0.05); TUG: 6/19/23/11 (p > 0.05); refinement procedures (n): DIEP:71/63/49/44 (p > 0.05); TUG: 65/41/36/56 (p > 0.05)), indicating safe and secure implementation of this step-wise training approach for microsurgical breast reconstruction in both aesthetic and reconstructive measures. Of note, despite being a perforator flap, DIEP flap required no more training than TUG flap, highlighting the importance of flap inset at the recipient site. MDPI 2021-12-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8707719/ /pubmed/34945171 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10245875 Text en © 2021 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Fischer, Sebastian Diehm, Yannick F. Kotsougiani-Fischer, Dimitra Gazyakan, Emre Radu, Christian A. Kremer, Thomas Hirche, Christoph Kneser, Ulrich Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title | Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title_full | Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title_fullStr | Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title_full_unstemmed | Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title_short | Teaching Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction—A Retrospective Cohort Study |
title_sort | teaching microsurgical breast reconstruction—a retrospective cohort study |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8707719/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34945171 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm10245875 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fischersebastian teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT diehmyannickf teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT kotsougianifischerdimitra teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT gazyakanemre teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT raduchristiana teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT kremerthomas teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT hirchechristoph teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy AT kneserulrich teachingmicrosurgicalbreastreconstructionaretrospectivecohortstudy |