Evaluating Patient-reported Outcomes after Bilateral Reduction Mammoplasty: A Comparison of Reduction Techniques at a University Hospital

Author:

Hinson Chandler S.1,Karne Sridhar1,Rosser Brandon1,Bouillon Victoria1,Brooks Ronald M.12

Affiliation:

1. Frederick P. Whiddon College of Medicine, University of South Alabama, Ala.

2. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Clinic, University of South Alabama Health, Mobile, Ala.

Abstract

Background: Macromastia, defined as the abnormal enlargement of breasts, burdens individuals physically and psychologically, impacting their daily lives beyond aesthetics. Reduction mammoplasty offers relief by restoring proportional breast volume and appropriate contour. Surgical success relies on choosing a suitable individualized operative technique tailored to the patient’s presentation and postoperative goals. This study examines postoperative, patient-reported outcomes across different reduction techniques to gauge the impact of reduction technique on overall patient perspective of aesthetic and functional satisfaction. Methods: A retrospective review identified reduction mammoplasty patients by a single surgeon between 2018 and 2022. Exclusion criteria included augmentation-related or cancer reconstructive procedures. Phone interviews were conducted using a survey adapted from BREAST-Q to assess postoperative outcomes in patients. Data analysis included Pearson chi-square test in STATA 16.1. Results: Among 155 patients identified, 64 completed the survey. Average postsurgical interval was 24 months postoperative. After stratifying patients by operative technique, there was no significant difference in postoperative satisfaction among the cohorts with regard to nipple and breast appearance, sensation, symmetry, or shape. Conclusions: This study highlights no significant disparity in perceived aesthetic or functional outcomes among different reduction mammoplasty techniques. Personalized considerations, such as patient factors, surgical expertise, and anatomical specifics, should guide technique selection, emphasizing individualized approaches over presumed superior methods for optimal results.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Cited by 1 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3