Background
Surgery is a radical treatment for hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) and may be considered as the only one potentially curative.
Objectives
To characterize HS recurrence in patients after surgery and assess the risk factors of recurrence.
Methods
We conducted a monocentric retrospective cohort study. All consecutive patients who had surgery (January 1, 2012 to March 31, 2017) were included. We estimated the rate of recurrence of HS lesions after surgery (<1 cm from the scar), and recurrence‐associated factors were analysed by univariate then multivariate logistic regression, estimating odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).
Results
A total of 75 patients [median age 31.4 years (range 16–71); 36 females], corresponding to 115 interventions were included. The Hurley score at surgery was III for 70 (60%) patients. In total, 61/115 (53%) interventions involved wide excision and 50 (43%) limited local excision. The localizations were axillary folds (n = 46; 40%), buttocks (n = 15, 13%), genital area (n = 13; 11%), perineal area (n = 12; 10%) and inguinal folds (n = 18; 16%). We observed 11 (10%) complications and 40 (35%) recurrences. On multivariate analysis, probability of recurrence was associated with only one‐stage surgical closure [OR 3.2 (95% CI 1.4–7.3), P = 0.005]. Overall, 44 (52%) patients were completely satisfied and 22 (26%) partially satisfied, and most (81%) considered the surgery the best treatment.
Conclusions
Hidradenitis suppurativa recurrence in our study was 35% and associated with one‐stage surgical closures, but two‐thirds of patients were satisfied with surgical treatment and would recommend surgery.
Objective aesthetic criteria are important for patient evaluation and analysis during aesthetic surgeries, while successful aesthetic surgeries must take into account the underlying ethnic differences. The aim of this study is to help surgeons and scientists better plan facial aesthetic surgeries and understand the aesthetic needs according to different patients by reviewing and comparing the current aesthetic principles and preferences in Caucasian and East Asian populations. PubMed and The Cochrane Library were searched using keywords regarding anthropometric measurements. Only original clinical studies and reviews written in English and Chinese and those that focused on the objective assessment of facial aesthetics in Caucasian and East Asian female populations were retained for review. Reference lists of the selected articles were also reviewed for eligible studies. Sixty-five articles that described objective aesthetic criteria in Caucasian and East Asian female populations were found through PubMed, among which 47 included Caucasian populations and 18 included East Asian populations. Compared with White women, East Asian women prefer a small, delicate, and less robust face, lower position of double eyelid, more obtuse nasofrontal angle, rounder nose tip, smaller tip projection, and slightly more retruded mandibular profile. Various differences exist between objective facial aesthetic criteria in Caucasian and East Asian populations. Further studies that focus on the objective aesthetic criteria of facial attractiveness in different ethnicities need to be conducted, especially in Asian countries. Level V: Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience, descriptive studies, or reports of expert committees.
The injection of A-PRP-HA appeared to be a promising method to improve the trophicity and hydration of vaginal mucosa for the treatment of VVA in postmenopausal breast cancer survivors with contraindications to hormone therapy.
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.