Reduction of seroma and improvement of quality of life after early drain removal in immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expander. Preliminary report from a randomized controlled study.
Activities of Daily Living
Device Removal
/ adverse effects
Drainage
/ adverse effects
Female
Humans
Intention to Treat Analysis
Mammaplasty
/ adverse effects
Middle Aged
Pain, Postoperative
/ diagnosis
Quality of Life
Seroma
/ diagnosis
Surgical Wound Infection
/ diagnosis
Time Factors
Tissue Expansion Devices
/ adverse effects
Wound Healing
Breast expander
Breast reconstruction
Drain removal
Quality of life (QoL)
Seroma
Journal
Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS
ISSN: 1878-0539
Titre abrégé: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101264239
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Oct 2021
Oct 2021
Historique:
received:
06
01
2019
revised:
07
01
2021
accepted:
26
02
2021
pubmed:
31
3
2021
medline:
18
11
2021
entrez:
30
3
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Seroma is the most common complication of breast reconstruction with tissue expander (incidence 0.2-20%) with increased risk of infection and implant loss by 4-6 fold. About 90% of plastic surgeons routinely placed drains for its prevention. We theorized that early drain removal is a safe procedure that improves postoperative quality of life (QoL), reducing pain, length of hospital stay, and limitations on daily activities. We divided 49 patients operated on between September 2016 and March 2018 (follow-up: 9-26 months) into two groups: Group1 (output-based; drains removed when <30 ml/day); and Group2 (early-removal; at 3-4 days postop.). A study-specific questionnaire about the patient's QoL was conducted 3 weeks after surgery. We performed an intention-to-treat analysis. A comparison was performed using a Fisher test and a Mann-Whitney U test with p = 0.05. We observed lower production of wound fluid (641±49 ml vs 231±20 ml; p = 0.004), and a shorter time until wound healing (31.3±4.2 days vs 22±3.9 days; p = 0.031) for Group 2. The difference for infection (p = 0.36), impaired wound healing (p = 0.22), and the seroma formation period (p = 0.11) was not significant. Group 2 experienced less breast pain (8% vs 87.5%; p = 0.001), fewer limitations in daily activities (16% vs 50%; p = 0.002), in mobility (20% vs 83.3%; p = 0.001), and in social life (8% vs 91.7%; p < 0.001), and a better quality of sleep than Group 1 (36% vs 75%; p = 0.002). Group 2 did not require home care after hospital discharge (p < 0.001). The limitations of study are: its small sample size, the wound healing assessment, and the use of a non-validated questionnaire.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33781704
pii: S1748-6815(21)00074-7
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2021.02.005
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2565-2572Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.