• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.32 no.5
• /
• pp.607-612
• /
• 2005

A traditional tie-over dressing may be applied to support the take of a skin graft. Although there are many advantage of this method, it has significant disadvantages, including time-consuming application. Furthermore, when the dressing is changed, the gauze becomes hard and can be stuck to the graft, causing damage and pain upon removal. The purpose of our study is to evaluate the effect of semi-occlusive dressing using polyurethane foam and film dressing($Allevyn^{(R)}$, $Opsite^{(R)}$) after full thickness skin graft. The authors treated 45 cases including burn scar contracture(n=38), syndactyly (n=1), absence of nipple-areolar complex(n=4), traumatic skin defect(n=1) and contact burn(n=1) with authors' method and 39 patients including burn scar contracture (n=39) with the tie-over dressing between 2000 and 2004. The patients in polyurethane foam and film dressing group ranged from 1 to 62 years of age (mean age, 15.1 years) and the patients in tie-over dressing group ranged from 2 to 60 years of age(mean age, 21.3 years). The postoperative results were analyzed according to the following measures: (1) the duration of graft-taking, (2) the admission period, (3) complications. Compared with the traditional tie-over dressing, polyurethane foam and film dressing was shown to be more successful in a reduced duration of graft-taking, in which was similar to the former in the rate of graft-taking, a reduced admission period and patient's discomfort. We concluded that semi-occlusive dressing using $Allevyn^{(R)}$ and $Opsite^{(R)}$ was an effective method after full thickness skin graft, which was easy to shape to difficult body locations, such as web spaces, fingers and maintains a moist environment for wound healing and does not stick to the wound.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.37 no.6
• /
• pp.749-757
• /
• 2010

Purpose: Since skin sparing mastectomy removes the mammary gland and the nipple-areolar complex preserving all mammary skin, it makes the widespread use of implants in immediate reconstruction. This article reports our experience in immediate breast reconstruction after skin sparing mastectomy by using the silicone implants in patients especially who have small to moderate sized and minimal ptotic breast. Methods: From September of 2007 to July of 2009, we performed breast reconstruction for 44 breasts of 40 women with silicone implant after mastectomy. Tumors were divided into 5 malignant types (21 IDC, 18 DCIS, 2 ILC, 2 phylloides tumor, 1 mucinous carcinoma). The implant is placed in a submuscular pocket or in a submuscularsubfascial pocket depending upon the condition of the muscles and skin flaps after mastectomy. Results: The mean age was 47 years and the average follow-up period was 11 months. Cosmetic outcome was assessed by evaluation of photographs and assessment of breast volume and shape, breast symmetry, and overall outcome. About 80% of each of these parameters was scored as good or excellent. Breast complication was developed in a total of 6 cases including 2 capsular contracture, 2 partial skin necrosis due to blue dye injection and 2 implant infection. Conclusion: The use of definitive implants in a skin sparing mastectomy is a one-stage immediate breast reconstruction with low morbidity and acceptable result. This method is considered reliable with favorable aesthetic result.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.48 no.5
• /
• pp.473-482
• /
• 2021

Background The increasing number of bilateral breast cancer patients has been accompanied by a growing need for bilateral mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. However, little research has investigated the complications and aesthetic outcomes related to bilateral reconstruction. Therefore, we analyzed retrospective data comparing the outcomes of bilateral reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps or implants. Methods This study included 52 patients (24 DIEP group and 28 implant group) who underwent bilateral mastectomy with immediate reconstruction between 2010 and 2020. Patient demographics, surgical characteristics, and complications were recorded. The difference between the left and right position of the nipple-areolar complex with respect to the sternal notch point at the clavicle was measured, and breast symmetry was evaluated. Results The average weight of breasts reconstructed with DIEP flaps (417.43±152.50 g) was higher than that of breasts with implants. The hospitalization period and operation time were significantly longer in the DIEP group. Early complications were significantly more common in the implant group (36.53%) than in the DIEP group. The angles between the nipples and the horizontal line were 1.09°±0.71° and 1.75°±1.45° in the DIEP and implant groups, respectively. Conclusions Although the surgical burden is lower, breast reconstruction using implants requires greater attention with respect to implant positioning, asymmetry, and complications than DIEP flap reconstruction. DIEP flap reconstruction has a prolonged operation time and a high risk of flap failure, but yields excellent cosmetic results and does not require intensive follow-up. Patients should be consulted to determine the most suitable option for them.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.49 no.4
• /
• pp.488-493
• /
• 2022

Background Currently, the BREAST-Q can effectively measure patient's satisfaction on the quality of life from the patient's perspective in relation to different type of breast reconstruction. However, evaluation of patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcomes in breast reconstruction may have potential to led bias. Methods To maximize the benefits of using BREAST-Q to evaluate clinical outcome, we performed comparative study focused on the correlation between postoperative BREAST-Q and cosmetic outcomes assessed by medical professionals. For the current analysis, we used three postoperative BREAST-Q scales (satisfaction with breast, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being). The Ten-Point Scale by Visser et al was applied to provide reproducible grading of the postoperative cosmetic outcomes of the breast. The system includes six subscales that measured overall aesthetic outcome, volume, shape, symmetry, scarring, and nipple-areolar complex. The photographic assessments were made by five medical professionals who were shown photographs on a computer screen in a random order. Obtained data were stored in Excel and evaluated by Spearman's correlations using SPSS Statistics. Results We enrolled 92 women in this study, 10 did not respond to all scales of postoperative BREAST-Q, the remaining 82 women had undergone breast reconstruction. The correlation between BREAST-Q score and aesthetic score measured by Ten-Point Scale for the three BREAST-Q scales all show positive values in Spearman's correlation coefficient. Conclusion A significant correlation without any bias observed was found between the patient's satisfaction measured by BREAST-Q after breast reconstruction and the medical expert's aesthetic evaluation.