IntroductionGynecomastia is a common problem of the male breasts, which imposes a great psychological burden on patients. It is mostly bilateral and frequently asymmetrical. Surgical management of gynecomastia has undergone significant changes over the past few decades. Currently, the predominant mode of treatment includes liposuction of the fibro-fatty tissue either alone or in combination with the removal of the glandular tissue by the open excision technique or arthroscopic shaver. This study aims to compare both techniques in terms of hematoma formation, nipple necrosis, reoperation, contour irregularities, acceptability of scarring, asymmetry, and patient satisfaction.MethodsThe study has been conducted at Shifa International Hospital, Islamabad, from May 2018 to September 2019. Sixty patients were included in the study. All the patients had bilateral gynecomastia and Simon’s Grade II-A or II-B. The study sample was divided into two equal groups. Group A underwent liposuction combined with open disc excision while Group B underwent liposuction coupled with disc excision via suction-assisted arthroscopic shaver. Postoperatively, all the patients received follow-up for a minimum period of six months.ResultsIn a cohort of 60 patients, the mean age was 25.76±5.38 years. There were minor differences noted in terms of hematoma formation, nipple necrosis, rates of re-operation, and contour irregularities between open disc excision and arthroscopic disc excision, respectively (p-value > 0.05). About eight patients reported asymmetry in open disc excision as compared to 10 in arthroscopic disc excision. The acceptability of scarring was reported as equal in both groups. Mean patient satisfaction was based on the visual analog scale (VAS) scale was 8.25 in both groups. No statistical difference regarding patient satisfaction was noted in both groups (p-value 0.126).ConclusionOur study concludes that arthroscopic shaver-assisted disc excision despite being a novel and minimally invasive technique does not hold superiority over conventional open disc excision for the management of gynecomastia. Furthermore, in a developing country like Pakistan, there is a lack of expertise with the procedure and a need for more training among plastic surgeons.
To discuss resection and various reconstructive options in patients with dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP). Methods This study was conducted at Shifa International Hospital, Islamabad, Pakistan, from May 2018 to December 2019. All patients aged 20 years or above of either gender who were diagnosed to have DFSP over this period were included in the study. All the patients underwent wide local excision of the tumor under general anesthesia. A peroperative frozen section was conducted in all the cases to confirm complete excision. Immediate reconstruction was performed following the tumor excision. The choice of reconstruction, i.e. free, regional, or local flap was based on the size of the resultant defect. Results The mean age of the patients was 37.11 ±10.91 years. There were 12 (66.7%) males and six (33.3%) females. The mean duration of the disease was 11.22 ±2.94 months. The affected anatomical site showed that the face was involved in the majority, nine (50%) patients, followed by the scalp in four (22.2%), nape of the neck in three (16.7%), and supraclavicular region in two (11.1%) patients. In most of the cases, the free flap was observed, i.e. (n=9, 50%), followed by a regional flap in seven (38.9%), and the local flap in two (10.1%) patients. Conclusion Wide local excision of the disease, confirmed on frozen section, offers improved survival. Among DFSP of the head and neck, the face was found to be the affected anatomical site in half the cases. Also, reconstruction following tumor excision with a free flap is the most favorable option among patients with DFSP.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.