背景:我们先前提出了一种使用高分辨率超声(HRUS)检测乳房植入物破裂的新颖方法。因此,我们进行了这次回顾,观察性研究,以描述其在接受基于植入物的隆乳术的患者术前诊断装置破裂的可行性。
方法:我们初步评估了2017年8月31日至2020年8月31日期间在其他医院使用乳房植入物进行初次或二次隆乳术的患者的医疗记录。患者使用Aplioi600(佳能医疗系统,Otawara,Tochigi,日本)带有7-18MHz线性换能器的系统。通过对患者病历的回顾性审查,我们分析了他们的基线和临床特征.然后,我们比较了HRUS破裂的术前诊断与再次手术的结果之间的一致性.
结果:评估了29例破裂患者(55个乳房)的超声诊断破裂的表现。这表明他们没有意识到破裂,但在超声检查中被诊断为破裂。术前,110例左乳房(80.9%)和107例右乳房(78.7%)无破裂,这与HRUS上没有破裂的乳房数量完全一致。此外,术前,左右乳腺破裂26例(19.1%),29例(21.3%),分别,这与HRUS上破裂的乳房数量完全一致。
结论:结论:怀疑乳房植入物破裂的患者应严格评估是否存在破裂,如果有的话,其使用HRUS的范围。此外,我们建议外科医生考虑使用HRUS进行乳房植入物破裂的术前诊断.
方法:本期刊要求作者为每篇文章分配一定程度的证据。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.
BACKGROUND: We previously proposed a novel method for detecting a rupture of a breast implant using high-resolution ultrasound (HRUS). We therefore conducted this retrospective, observational study to describe its feasibility in making a preoperative diagnosis of rupture of the device in patients receiving an implant-based augmentation mammaplasty.
METHODS: We initially evaluated the medical records of the patients who had received primary or secondary augmentation mammaplasty using a breast implant at other hospitals for aesthetic or reconstructive purposes between August 31, 2017, and August 31, 2020. The patients underwent breast US using the Aplio i600 (Canon Medical System, Otawara, Tochigi, Japan) system with a 7-18 MHz linear transducer. Through a retrospective review of the patients\' medical records, we analyzed their baseline and clinical characteristics. Then, we compared an agreement between preoperative diagnosis of rupture on HRUS and findings at reoperation.
RESULTS: A total of 29 patients with rupture (55 breasts) were evaluated for the performance of ultrasound in making a diagnosis of rupture. This showed that they were unaware of rupture but they were diagnosed with it on ultrasound. Preoperatively, there were no cases of rupture in 110 left breasts (80.9%) and 107 right breasts (78.7%), which exactly matched to the number of breasts without rupture on HRUS. Moreover, preoperatively, there were 26 (19.1%) and 29 cases (21.3%) of rupture in the left and right breast, respectively, which exactly matched to the number of breasts with rupture on HRUS.
CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, patients who are suspected of having rupture of a breast implant should be stringently evaluated for presence of rupture and, if any, its scope using HRUS. Moreover, we propose that surgeons consider using HRUS in making a preoperative diagnosis of rupture of a breast implant.
METHODS: 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 .