-
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Dec 2023Reduction mammaplasty (RM) has become established as the standard effective method for treating macromastia, but reports on the risk factors that predispose to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Reduction mammaplasty (RM) has become established as the standard effective method for treating macromastia, but reports on the risk factors that predispose to postoperative complications have been conflicting. This meta-analysis aimed to pool the available data to identify predictors of complications following RM.
METHODS
The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane databases were screened from inception to 1 Jan 2022, and studies were included based on predefined criteria. The perioperative risk factors BMI, smoking, age, diabetes, radiation therapy, and tissue resection weight were extracted and their correlation with complications assessed.
RESULTS
A total of 40 studies comprising of 5908 patients were included. BMI ≥ 30kg/m (OR = 1.65, 95% CI 1.35-2.02; p < 0.01) and ≥ 40 kg/m (OR = 1.97, 95% CI 1.26-3.08; p < 0.01), smoking (OR = 2.57, 95% CI 2.01-3.28; p < 0.01), diabetes (OR = 2.21, 95% CI 1.19-4.07; p < 0.05), a unilateral resection weight ≥ 1000 g (OR = 1.76, 95% CI 1.02-3.05; p < 0.05), and radiation therapy (OR = 11.11, 95% CI 2.01-3.28; p < 0.01) were associated with higher rates of postoperative complications. Obese patients (BMI ≥ 30 kg/m) were more likely to experience fat necrosis (OR = 3.00, 95% CI 1.37-6.57; p < 0.01) and infection (OR = 1.66, 95% CI 1.15-2.40; p < 0.05). Smokers had a 2.03 times higher risk of infection (95% CI 1.24-3.31; p < 0.01) and 2.34 times higher risk of dehiscence (95% CI 1.38-3.98; p < 0.01). No association between complication occurrence and age 40 or 50 years or total tissue resection weight ≥ 1000 g was identified.
CONCLUSIONS
This meta-analysis provides evidence that obesity, smoking, diabetes, unilateral resection weight ≥ 1000 g, and preoperative radiation therapy predispose to complication occurrence in RM. This information can optimize the ability of surgeons to provide preoperative patient education, perioperative assessment, and postoperative care planning.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Topics: Female; Humans; Adult; Mammaplasty; Breast; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications; Obesity; Diabetes Mellitus; Retrospective Studies; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37253843
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-023-03387-y -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jan 2024Implant-based breast reconstruction has evolved over time. However, the effects of prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared with those of subpectoral breast... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Implant-based breast reconstruction has evolved over time. However, the effects of prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared with those of subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) have not been clearly defined. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the occurrence of surgical complications between PBR and SBR to determine the procedure that is effective and relatively safe.
METHODS
The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published until April of 2021 comparing PBR and SBR following mastectomy. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. General information on the studies and surgical outcomes were extracted. Among 857 studies, 34 and 29 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed to clearly compare the results of patients who underwent postmastectomy radiation therapy.
RESULTS
Pooled results showed that prevention of capsular contracture (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79) and infection control (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.92) were better with PBR than with SBR. Rates of hematoma, implant loss, seroma, skin-flap necrosis, and wound dehiscence were not significantly different between PBR and SBR. PBR considerably improved postoperative pain, BREAST-Q score, and upper arm function compared with SBR. Among postmastectomy radiation therapy patients, the incidence rates of capsular contracture were significantly lower in the PBR group than in the SBR group (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.35).
CONCLUSIONS
The results showed that PBR had fewer postoperative complications than SBR. The authors' meta-analysis suggests that PBR could be used as an alternative technique for breast reconstruction in appropriate patients.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy; Breast Implantation; Mammaplasty; Postoperative Complications; Contracture; Breast Implants
PubMed: 37010460
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010493 -
Interventional Neuroradiology : Journal... Jun 2024Ischemic stroke and disability caused by carotid artery stenosis have always been worldwide problems. At present, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Ischemic stroke and disability caused by carotid artery stenosis have always been worldwide problems. At present, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) and transfemoral carotid artery stenting (TFCAS) have been commonly used to treat carotid artery stenosis. Recently, transcarotid artery revascularization (TCAR) seems to be another option.
METHODS
We searched PubMed and Embase to find literatures comparing TCAR with TFCAS and CEA. The primary outcomes were stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), transient ischemic attack (TIA), death, cranial nerve injure (CNI), and operative time. Secondary outcomes were stroke, death, MI in the elderly; cost; radiation; and entry site complication.
RESULTS
Initial search of the literature included 165 articles, of which 12 studies were chosen in the end. These studies demonstrated high technical success rate of TCAR. Patients who received TCAR had lower risks of death, stroke/death and less radiation exposure compared to TFCAS. In meta analysis, the risk of stroke was significantly lower in TCAR group than TFCAS (OR 0.63; 95%CI 0.47-0.85). And there was no significant difference in TIA and MI. TCAR was associated with shorter operative time, lower risk of CNI and less blood loss compared to CEA. In older patients, the effect of TCAR was significantly better than that of TFCAS.
CONCLUSION
TCAR is associated with a lower risk of perioperative stroke compared to TFCAS. TCAR is also associated with shorter operative time, lower risk of CNI and less blood loss compared to CEA. TCAR may be a promising treatment option besides TFCAS and CEA.
Topics: Humans; Carotid Stenosis; Endarterectomy, Carotid; Stents; Cerebral Revascularization; Treatment Outcome; Postoperative Complications; Stroke; Myocardial Infarction; Ischemic Attack, Transient
PubMed: 36039496
DOI: 10.1177/15910199221123283