Complications in different breast reconstruction methods after breast cancer surgery: a Meta-analysis
10.3760/cma.j.issn.1671-0290.2021.01.001
- VernacularTitle:乳腺癌术后不同乳房再造方法并发症的Meta分析
- Author:
Gang ZHANG
;
Hao GUO
;
Jie LIANG
;
Qiaoyu GUAN
;
Bing ZHANG
- From:
Chinese Journal of Medical Aesthetics and Cosmetology
2021;27(1):1-6
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To evaluate the relationship between breast reconstruction and postoperative complications by meta-analysis.Methods:Through a defined search strategy, related literature was collected in databases from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, CNKI, Wanfang Database and VIP Database, from January 1990 to November 2017. Data were extracted and each merged data was analyzed using RevMan 5.3 software. The postoperative complications between transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous-flap (TRAM) and deep inferior epigastric perforatorflap (DIEP), TRAM and latissimus dorsiflap (LDF), LDF and LDF+ prosthesis, LDF+ prosthesis and simple prosthesis implantation were compared.Results:Twenty-nine papers met inclusion criteria of our study. The Meta-analysis results showed that the risk of local flap necrosis, seroma, infection, fat liquefaction, abdominal wall hernia and abdominal bulging in TRAM group were higher than those in DIEP group, and the differences were significant. There was no significant difference in total flap necrosis, wound dehiscence, venous congestion between the two groups; the risk of total flap necrosis, wound dehiscence and infection in TRAM group were higher than those in LDF group, and the differences were significant. The risk of seroma in TRAM group was lower than that in LDF group, and the differences were significant. There was no significant difference in fat liquefaction between the two groups; there was no significant difference in the postoperative complications between LDF group and LDF+ prosthesis group; the risk of seroma in LDF+ prosthetic group was higher than that in prosthetic group, and the differences was significant. The risk of prosthetic capsular contracture and prosthesis displacement in LDF+ prosthetic group were lower than those in prosthetic group, and the differences were significant. There was no significant difference in prosthesis exposure and infection between the two groups.Conclusions:DIEP has most of the advantages of TRAM and fewer complications. It plays an important role in breast reconstruction in the future. We should make a choice of breast reconstruction methods according to the patient＇s conditions as far as possible in clinical practice.
