OBJECTIVE: This narrative review aims to improve understanding of what is meant by the term \'internal bra\', by providing an overview of the different techniques it refers to and suggesting more specific terminology for use going forward.
METHODS: A literature search of the Medline, Embase, and Google Scholar databases was conducted to identify papers in which a surgical technique was described using the term \'internal bra\'.
RESULTS: \'Internal bra\' techniques can be categorised into 5 groups: mesh techniques, acellular dermal matrix techniques, suture techniques, dermal flap techniques, and muscle techniques. Promising results exist for techniques in each group; however, research is generally limited by small studies with short follow up periods, and significant inconsistencies exist in use of the term \'internal bra\'.
CONCLUSIONS: The titles of the five groups identified in this paper should be used going forward when discussing \'internal bra\' techniques, in order to bring greater clarity to both surgical literature and patient information. Further research is also required to establish if \'internal bra\' techniques truly improve longevity of surgical results and if one technique, or group of techniques, is superior.
METHODS: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.
目的:本叙述性综述旨在提高对“内部胸罩”一词含义的理解,通过提供它所引用的不同技术的概述,并建议更具体的术语供未来使用。
方法:Medline的文献检索,Embase,和谷歌学者数据库进行,以确定使用术语“内部胸罩”描述手术技术的论文。
结果:\“内部胸罩\”技术可分为5组:网格技术,无细胞真皮基质技术,缝合技术,真皮皮瓣技术,肌肉技术。每个组中的技术都有有希望的结果;然而,研究通常受到随访时间短的小型研究的限制,在使用术语“内部胸罩”时存在显著的不一致。
结论:在讨论“内部胸罩”技术时,应使用本文确定的五个组的标题,为了使手术文献和患者信息更加清晰。还需要进一步的研究,以确定“内部胸罩”技术是否真正提高手术效果的寿命,如果一种技术,或一组技术,是优越的。
方法:本期刊要求作者为每个提交的证据分配一个级别,该级别的证据适用于循证医学排名。这不包括评论文章,书评,和有关基础科学的手稿,动物研究,尸体研究,和实验研究。对于这些循证医学评级的完整描述,请参阅目录或在线作者说明www。springer.com/00266.