GK News 2 - шаблон joomla Видео

Banner1

Log in
Powered by Spearhead Software Labs Joomla Facebook Like Button
10 May 2017
Naoual Benhmidou1, Fadoua Rais1, Fadila Kouhen2, Abdelhak Maghous1, Hasna Loughlimi1, Khadija Bellahammou3, Hanan Elkacemi1, Tayeb Kebdani1, Sanaa Elmajjaoui1, Noureddine Benjaafar1 1)
10 May 2017
Khadija Bellahammou1, Asmaa Lakhdissi1,
10 May 2017
Khaled Moursy Salama1, Monira T.
02 April 2017
Bardia Bidarmaghz, Ryo Mizumoto, Rasika

NIPPLE RECONSTRUCTION USING THE C-V FLAP TECHNIQUE: LONG-TERM OUTCOMES

Lona Jalini, Jonathan Lund, Vijay Kurup

1) North Tees and Hartlepool University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust,UK.

Disclosure: The author has declared no conflicts of interest.

Received: 17.02.16 Accepted: 31.03.16

1486385429 Quote  doi: 10.5455/ijsm.nipplereconstruction

pdf icon  Fulltext PDF Download

export icona  EndNote/RefWorks

altmetric journalmedica

Abstract:

Introduction: Nipple creation using the C-V flap technique is often the final step in breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to subjectively and objectively assess the cosmetic outcomes and satisfaction of patients undergoing C-V flap nipple reconstruction.
Methods: Subjective assessments of patient satisfaction with the neo-nipple were recorded by visual analogue scoring (VAS; 0-10). Objective measurements were performed using a calliper to measure nipple projection relative to the native breast. Descriptive data analysis was performed with differences in projection assessed with the Mann-Whitney test and mean and median VAS scores (with inter-quartile ranges; IQR) calculated to describe satisfaction.
Results: Thirty-three C-V flap nipple reconstructions were performed. 87.9% received latissimus dorsi (LD) reconstructions with implants and 12.1% had transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) reconstructions. The median projection of reconstructed nipples was 4.7 mm (range 4-10.2 mm) at 4.6 years mean follow-up, which was not significantly different from the contralateral nipple (p = 0.34). Patient satisfaction was 9 (IQR: 8-10) with shape, 9 (IQR: 7.5-10) with projection, 5 (IQR: 2-9.6) with sensation, and 8.5 (IQR: 6-9.5) with symmetry. Median overall satisfaction was 9 (IQR: 8-10). Three patients had complete nipple loss, of whom two had undergone nipple piercing post procedure and none had received radiotherapy.
Conclusion: C-V flap nipple reconstructions provide a simple and reliable method to reconstruct the nipple that enhances confidence and perception of body image. Satisfaction was high with long-term outcomes in terms of projection equivalent to the contralateral breast.

Keywords: C-V flap; nipple reconstruction; patient satisfaction


How to Cite this Article

Jalini, L., Lund, J. and Kurup, V. (2016). NIPPLE RECONSTRUCTION USING THE C-V FLAP TECHNIQUE: LONG-TERM OUTCOMES. International Journal of Surgery and Medicine, [online] 2(3). Available at: http://10.5455/ijsm.nipplereconstruction.
 

Cited by:

 

Last modified onSaturday, 15 April 2017 10:24

Leave a comment

Make sure you enter the (*) required information where indicated. HTML code is not allowed.

 09 May 2017
  190  
Fazlý Yanýk1; Gonul Sagiroglu2; Elif Copuroglu2; Yekta Altemur Karamustafaoglu1
 190 
Fazlý Yanýk1; Gonul Sagiroglu2; Elif Copuroglu2; Yekta Altemur Karamustafaoglu1
09 May 2017
 28 March 2017
  304  
Zuvdija Cecunjanin1, Amina Selimovic2, Selma Milisic1, Ermina Mujicic3
 304 
Zuvdija Cecunjanin1, Amina Selimovic2, Selma Milisic1, Ermina Mujicic3
28 March 2017
 28 March 2017
  643  
Michele Bisaccia1, Luigi Piscitelli1, Giovanni Colleruoli1, Giuseppe Rinonapoli1, Cristina Ibáñez Vicente1, Gabriele Falzarano2, Antonio Medici2, Luigi Meccariello3, Olga Bisaccia4, ...
 643 
Michele Bisaccia1, Luigi Piscitelli1, Giovanni Colleruoli1, Giuseppe Rinonapoli1, Cristina Ibáñez Vicente1, Gabriele Falzarano2, ...
28 March 2017
 26 March 2017
  326  
Roman Romansky1, George Baytchev2, Ivan Inkov2, Stefan Komitski1
 326 
Roman Romansky1, George Baytchev2, Ivan Inkov2, Stefan Komitski1
26 March 2017
 26 March 2017
  242  
Andrea Cappiello1, Verdiana Stano2, Michele Bisaccia1, Luigi Meccariello3, Gabriele Falzarano4, Antonio Medici4, Marco Pellegrino1, Olga Bisaccia5, Giuseppe Rinonapoli1, Auro Caraffa1.
 242 
Andrea Cappiello1, Verdiana Stano2, Michele Bisaccia1, Luigi Meccariello3, Gabriele Falzarano4, Antonio Medici4, Marco Pellegrino1, Olga Bisaccia5, ...
26 March 2017
 26 March 2017
  237  
Ventsislav Mutafchiyski1, Georgi Popivanov1, Dimitar Penchev1, Albena Fakirova2, Ivan Inkov3, Rumen Popov4
 237 
Ventsislav Mutafchiyski1, Georgi Popivanov1, Dimitar Penchev1, Albena Fakirova2, Ivan Inkov3, Rumen Popov4
26 March 2017
 26 March 2017
  330  
Thulasikumar Ganapathy1, Marunraj Gnanasekaran2, Aravind Moorthy3
 330 
Thulasikumar Ganapathy1, Marunraj Gnanasekaran2, Aravind Moorthy3
26 March 2017
 26 March 2017
  284  
Daniele Maiettini1, Marta Rossi2, Michele Bisaccia3, Auro Caraffa3, Luigi Meccariello4, Gabriele Falzarano5, Antonio Medici5, Luigi Piscitelli3, Giulio Metro2, Alberto Rebonato1
 284 
Daniele Maiettini1, Marta Rossi2, Michele Bisaccia3, Auro Caraffa3, Luigi Meccariello4, Gabriele Falzarano5, Antonio Medici5, Luigi Piscitelli3, ...
26 March 2017