English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 17918/22933 (78%)
Visitors : 7408180      Online Users : 89
RC Version 7.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
  • Adv. Search
    HomeLoginUploadHelpAboutAdminister Goto mobile version
    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://ir.csmu.edu.tw:8080/ir/handle/310902500/24859


    Title: Robotic versus conventional nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate gel implant breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer- A case control comparison study with analysis of clinical outcome, medical cost, and patient-reported cosmetic results
    Authors: Lai, HW;Chen, ST;Mok, CW;Lin, YJ;Wu, HK;Lin, SL;Chen, DR;Kuo, SJ
    Keywords: Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (R-NSM);Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM);Conventional nipple sparing mastectomy (C-NSM);Immediate get implant breast reconstruction (IGBR);Medical cost
    Date: 2020
    Issue Date: 2022-08-09T08:09:09Z (UTC)
    Publisher: ELSEVIER SCI LTD
    ISSN: 1748-6815
    Abstract: Background: Robotic nipple sparing mastectomy (R-NSM), which uses the da Vinci surgical platform, could perform NSM and immediate breast reconstruction through a small and inconspicuous extra-mammary axillary or lateral chest incision. R-NSM was reported with extremely low nipple areolar complex (NAC) necrosis rate, good cosmetic results, and high patient satisfaction. However, there was little evidence available comparing the effectiveness and safety of R-NSM and conventional NSM (C-NSM) in the management of breast cancer. Methods: A case control comparison study was conducted for patients with breast cancer who underwent R-NSM or C-NSM with immediate gel implant breast reconstruction (IGBR) from July 2011 to September 2019 at a single institution to compare the clinical outcomes, patient reported esthetic results, and medical cost. Results: According to the study design, 54 procedures of R-NSM were compared with 62 procedures of C-NSM in the surgical management of breast cancer combined with IGBR. Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM was associated with higher overall satisfaction (92% excellent and 8% good versus 75.6% excellent and 24.4% good, P=0.046), and wound/scar related outcome in patient reported esthetic results. The NAC ischemia/necrosis risk, overall complication rate, and blood loss were not significantly different between R-NSM and C-NSM groups. However, longer operation time and higher overall medical cost (10,877 +/- 796 versus 5,702 +/- 661 US Dollars, P<0.01) was observed in R-NSM group. Conclusion: Compared with C-NSM, R-NSM showed comparable clinical outcomes and favorable patients' satisfaction with the esthetic results, but at the price of longer operation time and higher cost. (C) 2020 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
    URI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2020.02.021
    https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000550163700015
    https://ir.csmu.edu.tw:8080/handle/310902500/24859
    Relation: JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY ,2020 ,v73 ,issue 8 ,p1514-1525
    Appears in Collections:[中山醫學大學研究成果] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    index.html0KbHTML143View/Open


    SFX Query

    All items in CSMUIR are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback