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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Fischer, Sebastian, Diehm, Yannick F., Kotsougiani-Fischer, Dimitra, Gazyakan, Emre, Radu, Christian A., Kremer, Thomas, Hirche, Christoph, Kneser, Ulrich
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