Background: The prepectoral implantation technique has been the standard procedure for cardiovascular implantable electronic device (CIED). However, it cannot be performed in such patients with thin skin or patients with cosmetic concerns. This study was designed to demonstrate the feasibility and safety of the subpectoral compared to the prepectoral approach.
Methods: We conducted a retrospective, nonrandomized comparison of the prepectoral (234 cases) and subpectoral approach (32 cases) in patients who received CIED implantation at a tertiary center between July 2012 and May 2015. We compared lead characteristics, procedure time and complications between the subpectoral and prepectoral approach.
Results: In the subpectoral group, two complications were observed, whereas six complications were found in the prepectoral group (2/32 vs. 6/234, respectively, =0.25). In the subpectoral group, one patient developed wound infection and the others were safely conducted without any complications. In the prepectoral group, two patients developed hemopericardium, three developed pocket hematoma requiring surgical revision, and one developed a pneumothorax. Procedure time in the subpectoral group took longer than that in the prepectoral group (150±50 min versus 91±49 min, =0.06). In lead characteristics, there were no significant differences between the two groups.
Conclusion: The subpectoral approach is technically feasible and non-inferior to the prepectoral approach, in the aspect of complication and lead characteristics, but seemed to take more procedure time. The subpectoral approach is a more reasonable choice for selected patients in whom the prepectoral approach is not feasible or in individuals who have cosmetic concerns.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
|---|---|
| http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6620812 | PMC |
| http://dx.doi.org/10.29252/wjps.8.2.163 | DOI Listing |
Publication Analysis
Top Keywords
Similar Publications
Prognosis of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy Flap Necrosis: Predictors of Failure and Salvage.
Aesthetic Plast Surg
January 2025
Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, 06351, Republic of Korea.
Background: In the realm of implant-based breast reconstruction, mastectomy flap necrosis (MFN) is a prevalent yet grave complication that poses a threat to the stability of the inserted prosthesis. Although numerous investigations have scrutinized the risk factors for MFN development, few have delved into the aftermath, specifically implant failure or salvage. This study seeks to appraise the prognosis of the implanted prosthesis following MFN occurrence, as well as identify predictors of such outcomes.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFComparison of outcomes following prepectoral and subpectoral implants for breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer.
Front Oncol
January 2025
Thyroid and Breast Medical Center, Weifang People's Hospital, Shandong Second Medical University, Weifang, Shandong, China.
Background: In recent years, different approaches to implant-based breast reconstruction have increasingly become an important option to meet both the treatment and postoperative aesthetic needs of breast cancer patients. This study selected two commonly used techniques for the prepectoral approach: single-incision, gas-inflated endoscopic prepectoral breast reconstruction (SIE-BR) and open prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (C-BR), as well as a commonly used technique for the subpectoral approach: open subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (SI-BR). By comparing the clinical efficacy and aesthetic outcomes of these three techniques in the treatment of breast cancer patients, this study aims to summarize the advantages of the prepectoral approach.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFImmediate Breast Reconstruction by Prepectoral Implant Approach with Polypropylene Mesh.
Aesthetic Plast Surg
January 2025
Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, University Centre for Research & Development, Chandigarh University, Mohali, Punjab, India.
Nomogram-based Approach for Predicting Complication Risks Following Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction.
Plast Reconstr Surg
December 2024
Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, 81 Irwon-ro, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, South Korea.
Background: Despite the recent steep rise in the use of prepectoral direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction, concerns remain regarding the potentially risk of complications, resulting in the selective application of the technique; however, the selection process was empirically based on the operator's decision. Using patient and operation-related factors, this study aimed to develop a nomogram for predicting postoperative complications following prepectoral DTI reconstruction.
Methods: Between August 2019 and March 2023, immediate prepectoral DTI was performed for all patients deemed suitable for one-stage implant-based reconstruction.
Capsular Contracture After Postmastectomy Radiation in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Effect of Implant Pocket and Two-Stage Surgery.
J Breast Cancer
December 2024
Department of Plastic & Reconstruction Surgery, Gangnam Severance Hospital, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Capsular contracture (CC) is a concerning issue for individuals undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) with implant-based breast reconstruction. This study investigated whether the extent of CC and implant migration differs based on implant placement and the reconstruction stage. Insertion plane and stage of breast implants were investigated, and the presence and severe cases of CC and implant migration were analyzed.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFWant AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!