Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros












Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open ; 11(6): e5040, 2023 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37325376

RESUMEN

Infection after implant-based breast reconstruction adversely affects surgical outcomes and increases healthcare utilization. This study aimed to quantify how postimplant breast reconstruction infections impact unplanned reoperations, hospital length of stay, and discontinuation of initially desired breast reconstruction. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study using Optum's de-identifed Clinformatics Data Mart Database to analyze women undergoing implant breast reconstruction from 2003 to 2019. Unplanned reoperations were identified via Current Procedural Terminology (CPT) codes. Outcomes were analyzed via multivariate linear regression with Poisson distribution to determine statistical significance at P < 0.00625 (Bonferroni correction). Results: In our national claims-based dataset, post-IBR infection rate was 8.53%. Subsequently, 31.2% patients had an implant removed, 6.9% had an implant replaced, 3.6% underwent autologous salvage, and 20.7% discontinued further reconstruction. Patients with a postoperative infection were significantly associated with increased incidence rate of total reoperations (IRR, 3.11; 95% CI, 2.92-3.31; P < 0.001) and total hospital length of stay (IRR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.48-1.63; P < 0.001). Postoperative infections were associated with significantly increased odds of abandoning reconstruction (OR, 2.92; 95% CI, 0.081-0.11; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Unplanned reoperations impact patients and healthcare systems. This national, claims-level study shows that post-IBR infection was associated with a 3.11× and 1.55× increase in the incidence rate of unplanned reoperations and length of stay. Post-IBR infection was associated with 2.92× increased odds of abandoning further reconstruction after implant removal.

2.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open ; 10(12): e4707, 2022 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36530858

RESUMEN

The introduction of mesh for reinforcement of ventral hernia repair (VHR) led to a significant reduction in hernia recurrence rates. However, it remains controversial whether synthetic or biologic mesh leads to superior outcomes. Recently, hybrid mesh consisting of reinforced biosynthetic ovine rumen (RBOR) has been developed and aims to combine the advantages of biologic and synthetic mesh; however, outcomes after VHR with RBOR have not yet been compared with the standard of care. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis on 109 patients, who underwent VHR with RBOR (n = 50) or synthetic polypropylene mesh (n = 59). Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, postoperative complications, and recurrence rates were analyzed and compared between the groups. Multivariate logistic regression models were fit to assess associations of mesh type with overall complications and surgical site occurrence (SSO). Results: Patients who underwent VHR with RBOR were older (mean age 63.7 versus 58.8 years, P = 0.02) and had a higher rate of renal disease (28.0 versus 10.2%, P = 0.01) compared with patients with synthetic mesh. Despite an unfavorable risk profile, patients with RBOR had lower rates of SSO (16.0 versus 30.5%, P = 0.12) and similar hernia recurrence rates (4.0 versus 6.78%, P = 0.68) compared with patients with synthetic mesh. The use of synthetic mesh was significantly associated with higher odds for overall complications (3.78, P < 0.05) and SSO (3.87, P < 0.05). Conclusion: Compared with synthetic polypropylene mesh, the use of RBOR for VHR mitigates SSO while maintaining low hernia recurrence rates at 30-month follow-up.

3.
Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open ; 10(2): e4083, 2022 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35141102

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The use of biologic mesh to reinforce the abdominal wall in ventral hernia repair has been proposed as a viable alternative to synthetic mesh, particularly for high-risk patients and in contaminated settings. However, a comparison of clinical outcomes between the currently available biologic mesh types has yet to be performed. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of 141 patients who had undergone ventral hernia repair with biologic mesh, including noncross-linked porcine ADM (NC-PADM) (n = 51), cross-linked porcine ADM (C-PADM) (n = 17), reinforced biologic ovine rumen (RBOR) (n = 36), and bovine ADM (BADM) (n = 37) at the Stanford University Medical Center between 2002 and 2020. Postoperative donor site complications and rates of hernia recurrence were compared between patients with different biologic mesh types. RESULTS: Abdominal complications occurred in 47.1% of patients with NC-PADM, 52.9% of patients with C-PADM, 16.7% of patients with RBOR, and 43.2% of patients with BADM (P = 0.015). Relative risk for overall complications was higher in patients who had received NC-PADM (RR = 2.64, P = 0.0182), C-PADM (RR = 3.19, P = 0.0127), and BADM (RR = 2.11, P = 0.0773) compared with those who had received RBOR. Furthermore, relative risk for hernia recurrence was also higher in all other mesh types compared with RBOR. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that RBOR decreases abdominal complications and recurrence rates after ventral hernia repair compared with NC-PADM, C-PADM, and BADM.

SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...