切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版) ›› 2023, Vol. 17 ›› Issue (03) : 262 -266. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1674-3946.2023.03.009

论著

不同方案乳房重建术患者报告结局及并发症分析
范拥国1, 吕勇刚2, 杨晓民1, 王虎霞1, 陈楠1, 贺赛1, 侯艳妮1, 赵静1, 张静远1, 韩丕华1,()   
  1. 1. 710061 西安,陕西省肿瘤医院乳腺肿瘤科
    2. 710021 西安,西安市第三医院
  • 收稿日期:2022-09-05 出版日期:2023-06-26
  • 通信作者: 韩丕华

Analysis of outcomes and complications reported by patients undergoing breast reconstruction with different protocols

Yongguo Fan1, Yonggang Lyu2, Xiaomin Yang1, Huxia Wang1, Nan Chen1, Sai He1, Yanni Hou1, Jing Zhao1, Jingyuan Zhang1, Pihua Han1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Breast Oncology,Shaanxi Provincal Cancer Hospital,Xi’an 710061,China
    2. Xi’an Third Hospital,Xi’an Shaanxi Province 710021,China
  • Received:2022-09-05 Published:2023-06-26
  • Corresponding author: Pihua Han
  • Supported by:
    Second Class Project of Health Research Talents of Xi’an(J201902045)
引用本文:

范拥国, 吕勇刚, 杨晓民, 王虎霞, 陈楠, 贺赛, 侯艳妮, 赵静, 张静远, 韩丕华. 不同方案乳房重建术患者报告结局及并发症分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(03): 262-266.

Yongguo Fan, Yonggang Lyu, Xiaomin Yang, Huxia Wang, Nan Chen, Sai He, Yanni Hou, Jing Zhao, Jingyuan Zhang, Pihua Han. Analysis of outcomes and complications reported by patients undergoing breast reconstruction with different protocols[J]. Chinese Journal of Operative Procedures of General Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(03): 262-266.

目的

分析一步法和二步法乳房重建手术对患者报告结局及并发症的影响。

方法

选取2017年3月至2022年3月98例乳房全切术后即刻乳房重建患者的临床资料,根据重建方式不同分为两组,一步法组50例行即刻假体植入乳房重建手术,二步法组48例行即刻扩张器-延迟假体植入乳房重建手术。SPSS 21.0软件完成数据分析,计数资料比较行χ2检验或Fisher精确检验;计量资料用(

xˉ
±s)表示,组间比较行t检验;采用线性混合效应回归模型对术后并发症和患者报告结局进行多因素回归分析。P<0.05为差异有统计学意义。

结果

一步法组血清肿、切口愈合不良发生率高于二步法组,包膜挛缩发生率低于二步法组(P<0.05);一步法组Clavien-Dindo分级Ⅲ级例数多于二步法组(P<0.05);一步法组患者术后社会心理健康、乳房满意度及手术结果满意度等水平均低于二步法组(P<0.05)。线性混合效应回归模型分析结果显示:切口愈合不良与手术方法和使用补片有关(P=0.043、0.033);包膜挛缩及血清肿的发生分别与放疗和补片的使用有关(P=0.041、0.036);患者社会心理健康、乳房满意度与手术方法有关(P=0.024、0.001);手术结果满意度与术后放疗和淋巴结状态有关(P=0.017、0.039)。

结论

相比一步法乳房重建,二步法可降低切口愈合不良的发生比,并发症分级低,在提高患者术后社会心理满意度和乳房满意度方面更具优势。

Objective

To analyze the effects of one-and two-step breast reconstruction on patient reported outcomes and complications.

Methods

A total of 98 patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction after total mastectomy from March 2017 to March 2022 were selected and divided into two groups according to different reconstruction methods:the one-step group received 50 cases of immediate prosthesis implantation reconstruction surgery,and the two-step group received 48 cases of immediate dilator-delayed prosthesis implantation reconstruction surgery. SPSS 21.0 software was used to analyze the data,and the count data were compared by line χ2 test or Fisher exact test. Measurement data were represented by(

xˉ
±s),and t test was performed for comparison between groups. Multivariate regression analysis of postoperative complications and patient-reported outcomes was performed using linear mixed effects regression model. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results

The incidence of seroma and poor wound healing in one-step group was higher than that in two-step group,and the incidence of capsular contracture was lower than that in two-step group(P<0.05). The number of Clavien-Dindo grade Ⅲ cases in one-step group was higher than that in two-step group(P<0.05). The levels of postoperative social mental health,breast satisfaction and surgical outcome satisfaction in one-step group were lower than those in two-step group(P<0.05). The results of linear mixed effects regression model showed that the poor wound healing was related to the surgical method and the use of mesh(P=0.043,0.033). Capsular contracture and seroma were related to radiotherapy and mesh use(P=0.041,0.036). Social psychological health and breast satisfaction were correlated with surgical methods(P=0.024,0.001). The satisfaction of surgical outcome was related to postoperative radiotherapy and lymph node status(P=0.017,0.039).

Conclusions

Compared with one-step breast reconstruction,two-step method can reduce the incidence of poor incision healing,lower complication grade,and has more advantages in improving patients' postoperative social psychological satisfaction and breast satisfaction.

表1 98例乳腺癌乳房全切术不同乳房重建术式两组患者一般资料比较[(
xˉ
±s),例]
表2 98例乳腺癌乳房全切术不同乳房重建术式两组患者术后并发症比较(例)
表3 98例乳腺癌乳房全切术不同乳房重建术式两组患者术后报告结局比较(
xˉ
±s)
表4 98例乳腺癌乳房全切术患者术后并发症的混合效应回归分析
表5 98例乳腺癌乳房全切术患者报告结局的混合效应回归分析
[1]
汤志英,万芳. 乳腺癌发病流行病学影响因素调查及疗效分析[J]. 中国妇幼保健202136(10):2349-2353.
[2]
肖汉,唐成欣,车艾兰. 早期乳腺癌微创治疗的新进展[J]. 医学综述202228(05):910-914.
[3]
Momeni AGiunta RE. Breast Reconstruction in Breast Cancer[J]. Handchir Mikrochir Plast Chir202254(4):268.
[4]
Lee CCPerng CKMa H,et al. Long-Term Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction[J]. Ann Plast Surg202288(1s Suppl 1):S78-S84.
[5]
Salzberg CA. Focus on technique:one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction[J]. Plast Reconstr Surg2012130(5 Suppl 2):95S-103S.
[6]
Nahabedian MYJacobson SR. Two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction[J]. Gland Surg20198(1):43-52.
[7]
Har-Shai LOfek SEBrandstetter A,et al. Quality of Patient-Reported Outcome Studies Utilizing the BREAST-Q:A Systematic Review[J]. Aesthet Surg J202141(11):NP1448-NP1458.
[8]
刘峥,杨基鹏,任思媛,等. 保留乳头的乳腺癌切除术在早期乳腺癌患者中临床效果研究[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),202014(03):273-276.
[9]
宋海涛,马斌,杨乐,等. 保留乳头乳晕复合体乳房切除术中三种乳房重建术的临床效果对比[J/CD]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版),202115(06):613-616.
[10]
Volders JHNegenborn VLSpronk PE,et al. Breast-conserving surgery following neoadjuvant therapy-a systematic review on surgical outcomes[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat2018168(1):1-12.
[11]
李宇翔,丰锦春,朱丽萍,等. 植入物乳房重建一步法和二步法临床对比研究[J]. 现代肿瘤医学202028(10):1668-1673.
[12]
Toh UTakenaka MIwakuma N,et al. Clinical outcomes of patients after nipple-sparing mastectomy and reconstruction based on the expander/implant technique[J]. Surg Today202151(6):862-871.
[13]
苏效添,曾媛媛. 乳腺癌术后不同方法乳房重建的安全性研究进展[J]. 医学综述202228(06):1163-1167.
[14]
李正东,成小林,武羿,等. 女性乳腺癌全乳切除术后乳房假体一步法及两步法重建效果比较[J]. 同济大学学报(医学版)202041(06):754-759.
[15]
Shumway DAMomoh AOSabel MS,et al. Integration of Breast Reconstruction and Postmastectomy Radiotherapy[J]. J Clin Oncol202038(20):2329-2340.
[16]
Toyserkani NMJørgensen MGTabatabaeifar S,et al. Autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction:A systematic review and meta-analysis of Breast-Q patient-reported outcomes[J]. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg202073(2):278-285.
[1] 李婷婷, 崔翔, 刘静, 吴鑫, 杨汐, 陈莉. 新型脐周按钮式切口在横向腹直肌肌瓣乳房重建中的应用[J]. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 347-352.
[2] 夏效泳, 王立超, 朱治国, 丛云海, 史宗新. 深度塌陷性胫骨平台骨折的形态特点和治疗策略[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 625-632.
[3] 刘鹏, 周莹佳, 常彦峰, 甄平, 李生贵, 刘军, 周胜虎. 类风湿关节炎行关节置换围术期风险管理的研究进展[J]. 中华关节外科杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(04): 540-548.
[4] 李建美, 邓静娟, 杨倩. 两种术式联合治疗肝癌合并肝硬化门静脉高压的安全性及随访评价[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 41-44.
[5] 逄世江, 黄艳艳, 朱冠烈. 改良π形吻合在腹腔镜全胃切除消化道重建中的安全性和有效性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 66-69.
[6] 杨体飞, 杨传虎, 陆振如. 改良无充气经腋窝入路全腔镜下甲状腺手术对喉返神经功能的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2024, 18(01): 74-77.
[7] 陈垚, 徐伯群, 高志慧. 改良式中间上入路根治术治疗甲状腺癌的有效性安全性研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 619-622.
[8] 陈大敏, 曹晓刚, 曹能琦. 肥胖对胃癌患者手术治疗效果的影响研究[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(06): 651-653.
[9] 宋钰, 赵阳, 王惠君, 廖新华. 术前BMI与可切除胃癌患者术后远期生存的关系[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 530-533.
[10] 汪毅, 许思哲, 任章霞. 胸乳入路腔镜单侧甲状腺叶切除术与开放手术对分化型甲状腺癌患者术后恢复的影响[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 542-545.
[11] 陈俊宇, 崔宇. TAPP治疗腹股沟嵌顿疝的临床分析[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 546-549.
[12] 赵新亮, 荆克杰, 樊红艳, 王妮, 葸根. 腹腔镜完全腹膜外补片与腹腔内补片治疗两侧下腹壁切口疝的临床对比观察[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 554-557.
[13] 惠立良, 王成果, 段东峰, 王健. 腹腔镜保留脾脏胰体尾切除术治疗胰体尾部良性肿瘤及部分交界性肿瘤的临床效果[J]. 中华普外科手术学杂志(电子版), 2023, 17(05): 558-561.
[14] 潘冰, 吕少诚, 赵昕, 李立新, 郎韧, 贺强. 淋巴结清扫数目对远端胆管癌胰十二指肠切除手术疗效的影响[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 608-612.
[15] 崔佳琪, 吴迪, 陈海艳, 周惠敏, 顾元龙, 周光文, 杨军. TACE术后并发肝脓肿的临床诊治分析[J]. 中华肝脏外科手术学电子杂志, 2023, 12(06): 688-693.
阅读次数
全文


摘要