Correction of Rectus Abdominis Diastasis: A Prospective Comparative Study Between a New Suturable Polypropylene Mesh Vs Polypropylene Standard Suture Plication.

BACKGROUND: Duramesh is a new suturing concept, combining the principles of meshes with the precision, flexibility and versatility of a suture, suitable also for Abdominal Rectus Diastasis correction. OBJECTIVES: This prospective research aimed at comparing this mesh usage versus the polypropylene standard suture plication for Rectus Diastasis repair in terms of safety (infection, seroma, hematoma, surgical wound dehiscence and fistula rates and hospital stay), effectiveness (ARD recurrence evidenced through Ultrasound Sonography, palpability of the muscular suture, surgical time and postoperative pain evaluation) and satisfaction of the patients based on PROMs (BODY-Q). METHODS: 65 of the initial 70 patients, undergoing rectus diastasis repair, with a 6 months FU, were randomly divided in two groups: 1 composed of 33 patients treated with Duramesh and 2 of 32 patients treated with standard polypropylene 0 suture plication. Data regarding infection, seroma, hematoma, surgical wound dehiscence and fistula rates, hospital stay, ARD recurrence, palpability of the muscular suture, surgical time, postoperative pain evaluation (VAS) and PROMs (BODY-Q) were analyzed by Prism9. RESULTS: No significant differences were reported between the two groups in terms of: infection, seroma, hematoma, surgical wound dehiscence and fistula rates and hospital stay. The mesh usage decreases the time required to perform plication compared with standard polypropylene detached stitches suture. No statistically significant differences were found out regarding VAS and BODY-Q data. CONCLUSIONS: Duramesh 0 application for Rectus Diastasis repair is safe and effective without compromising aesthetic improvement, as compared to standard polypropylene 0 plication.

Relevance of Self-Consciousness of Appearance on Patient Satisfaction in Primary Rhinoplasty: a 12-Month Follow-up Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Rhinoplasty procedure has a strong impact on patient quality of life. Plastic surgery patients show a degree of appearance-related distress higher than general population, especially patients undergoing rhinoplasty. Relationship between patient-reported outcome after rhinoplasty and self-consciousness of appearance needs further studies. The aim of this study is to investigate this correlation, considering the surgeon external evaluation as well. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 50 consecutive patients underwent primary cosmetofunctional rhinoseptoplasty. Appearance-related distress and surgical outcome were assessed by DAS59 (Derriford Appearance Scale 59) and SCHNOS (Standardised Cosmesis and Health Nasal Outcomes Survey), administered before and after surgery. Follow-up period was 12 months. Third-party clinical outcome was evaluated by three plastic surgeons by a scale ranging from 1 (poor outcome) to 5 (excellent outcome). RESULTS: A first division in Group 1 (satisfied) and Group 2 (unsatisfied) was done. DAS59 mean score in Group 1 showed to be statistically lower than Group 2 (p value < 0.05). Spearman's test showed a large strong positive correlation between preoperative and postoperative DAS59 and SCHNOS-C score variations (Delta 0-12 months) (r = 0.7514, p<0.001), as well as between DAS59 and SCHNOS-O (r = 0.5117, p<0.001) and between SCHNOS-C and SCHNOS-O (r = 0.6928, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Rhinoseptoplasty has a significant impact on the patient self-consciousness of appearance, in both negative and positive terms. We emphasize the surgeon's burden, who need to carefully assess and address the patient's expectations during the first evaluation. This distinction is crucial since unrealistic expectations may lead to dissatisfaction even after a properly performed procedure. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Switching from Galenic to Advanced Dressings or Vacuum Assisted Closure Therapy Can Improve Quality of Life of Patients with Chronic Non-Responsive Pressure Skin Ulcers: Preliminary Data with Italian Translation of WOUND-Q.

Objective: A few studies have focused on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with chronic non-responsive pressure skin ulcers. The aim of this study was to assess how correct treatment (advanced wound care [AWC] dressings alone or vacuum assisted closure [VAC] therapy alone) changes the QoL of these patients. Approach: One hundred six patients with chronic non-responsive pressure skin ulcers, who had previously used galenic dressings, applied without proper therapeutic indication, were included in this study. We administered the WOUND-Q, at time 0 and after 1 month of appropriate therapy, to assess patient-reported outcome measures. Group 1 consisted of 30 patients treated with advanced dressings, Group 2: 22 patients treated with VAC therapy, and Group 3: 30 patients continuing conventional galenic dressings (Control group). Statistical analysis allowed us to analyze QoL changes over time and to compare WOUND-Q Group 1 and 2 deltas with those of Group 3. The study followed the STROBE statement. Results and Innovation: In all the scales evaluated (Assessment, Drainage, Smell, Life impact, Psychological, Social, Sleep and Dressing), there were significant improvements in mean values for Groups 1 and 2. Kruskal-Wallis tests with Dunn's multiple-comparisons tests and Brown-Forsythe and Welch Analysis of Variance tests demonstrated significant differences between deltas of Group 1 and Group 2 compared with those of Group 3 for most scales analyzed. Conclusions: Administration of the WOUND-Q demonstrated that the application of advanced dressings alone or VAC therapy alone positively affects the QoL of patients with chronic nonresponsive pressure wounds, in comparison with galenic dressings alone. The WOUND-Q has been shown to be a valid tool in studying changes in QoL of these patients.

Main Factors Influencing Patient Satisfaction After Primary Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Study Based on Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

BACKGROUND: Primary breast augmentation is one of the most sought-after procedures in cosmetic surgery. It is generally related to a high degree of patient satisfaction, but it is not always obvious which factors have greater influence on patient satisfaction. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate how anthropometric, psychological, and social parameters, in association with the main surgical variables, influenced patients' satisfaction with their breasts after surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing primary breast augmentation between October 2018 and February 2022, who completed a 12-month follow-up without complications, were enrolled in the study. For each patient we recorded: BMI, pinch test (upper pole of the breast), surgical access, implant pocket, implant volume, bra size increase, age, smoking habit, civil status, education level, pregnancies, and psychiatric disorders. Each variable was statistically correlated with patient's satisfaction, assessed by BREAST-Q questionnaire preoperatively and 12 months postoperatively. RESULTS: Analyzing the data of the 131 patients, we found 3 factors affecting their satisfaction (P<.05); BMI: underweight patients were less satisfied than normal and overweight patients; pinch test: patients with a pinch test >2 cm were more satisfied; volume of the implant and bra size increase: patients with implant volume <300 cc and a less than 2 bra size increase were less satisfied than patients with larger augmentation. CONCLUSIONS: BMI, pinch test, implant volume, and extent of volumetric enhancement should be taken into careful consideration by the surgeon during preoperative consultation and surgical planning, because they can be critical to patient satisfaction.

Impact of Incisional Access Site in Primary Breast Augmentation: Evaluation of Patient Satisfaction with SCAR-Q.

BACKGROUND: Scarring at the incision site represents one of the most impactful outcomes in breast augmentation surgery for both the patient and the surgeon. Few studies exist with the aim of assessing patient perception of scarring outcomes in primary breast augmentation. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on quality of life of scars by submitting the SCAR-Q in patients who underwent primary augmentation mammoplasty. METHODS: The SCAR-Q was administered at one and at 6 months after surgery to 54 consecutive patients underwent primary breast augmentation with inferior hemi-periareolar or inframammary incision. A total of 50 patients were divided into two groups of 21 patients with inferior hemi-periareolar incision and 29 patients with inframammary fold incision, respectively. Statistical analysis was performed with Prism 9. RESULTS: All mean values of the three SCAR-Q scales tend to decrease at the second administration meaning that the perception of the scar is better at time 6 from the patient perspective. In the "Psychosocial scale," lower values at both 1 month and 6 months for group 2 compared to group 1 were shown. Unpaired T tests with Welch's correction showed significance for delta values variations between the two groups with P values <0.0001. CONCLUSION: Data show that patients undergoing primary breast augmentation have a scar that has no significant impact. Patients with inframammary fold scar have less psychosocial impact than those with inferior hemi-periareolar scar. There were no statistically significant differences in scar-related symptoms and scar appearance between scar along the inframammary groove and inferior hemi-periareolar scar. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: Case series study. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors   www.springer.com/00266 .

The Correlation Between the Improvement in Patient's Quality of Life and Surgeon's Satisfaction Following Primary Breast Augmentation: A Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is the primary goal in breast augmentation, but in a few cases patient satisfaction and surgeon satisfaction are in disagreement. OBJECTIVES: The authors try to explain the reasons associated with disparity between patient and surgeon satisfaction. METHODS: Seventy-one patients who underwent primary breast augmentation with dual-plane technique, with inframammary or inferior hemi-periareolar incision, were enrolled in this prospective study. Quality of life was evaluated with BREAST-Q preoperatively and postoperatively. Preoperative and postoperative photographic analysis was performed by a heterogeneous group of experts who completed the validated Breast Aesthetic Scale (BAS). The patient satisfaction score was compared with the overall appearance as determined by the validated BAS; a difference in score of 1 or more was considered a discordant judgement. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS version 18.0, with values of P < .01 considered statistically significant. RESULTS: BREAST-Q analysis showed a significative improvement in quality of life on the psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being chest scale and satisfaction with the breast (P < .01). Of the 71 pairs, 60 had a concordant judgment between patient and surgeon, and 11 were discordant. The score expressed by the patients (4.35 ± 0.69) was on average higher than that of the third-party observers (3.88 ± 0.58), with P < .001. CONCLUSIONS: Patient satisfaction is the main goal following the success of a surgical or medical procedure. BREAST-Q and photographs during the preoperative period are helpful to understanding the patient's real expectations.