Microsurgery · 2022
Penoscrotal defect reconstruction using loco-regional flaps in treatment of extramammary Paget's disease: Experience and suggestion of a simplified algorithm.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kim Woo-Ju, Kim Su-Hwan, Sung Hyun-Hwan, Lee Kyeong-Tae, Pyon Jai-Kyong
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Reconstruction of penoscrotal defects resulted from margin-controlled excision of extramammary Paget's disease (EMPD) remains challenging, due to its unpredictably varying extents. The present study aimed to investigate outcomes of reconstruction of penoscrotal defects following radical excision of EMPD and to introduce a simplified algorithm for selecting reconstruction strategies.
METHODS: Patients with penoscrotal EMPD who were treated with wide excision and subsequent reconstruction from 2009 to 2020 were reviewed. Their demographics, operation-related characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS: In total, 46 patients with a mean age of 64.9 years (range, 44-85 years) were analyzed. An average size of defects was 129.6 cm2 (range, 8-900 cm2 ). The most frequently involving anatomical subunit was scrotum, followed by suprapubic area and penile shaft. Twenty-six patients had defects spanning multiple subunits. The most commonly used reconstruction methods for each anatomical subunit were internal pudendal artery perforator (IPAP) flaps and/or scrotal flaps for scrotal defects, superficial external pudendal artery perforator (SEPAP) flaps for suprapubic defects, and skin grafts for penile defects. In all but four cases, successful reconstruction was achieved with combination of those reconstruction options. No major complications developed except for one case of marginal flap necrosis. All patients were satisfied with their aesthetic and functional results.
CONCLUSIONS: Diverse penoscrotal defects following excision of EMPD could be solidly reconstructed with combination of several loco-regional options. A simplified algorithm using in combination of IPAP flap, SEPAP flap, scrotal flap, and skin graft may enable efficient and reliable reconstruction of penoscrotal EMPD defects.
METHODS: Patients with penoscrotal EMPD who were treated with wide excision and subsequent reconstruction from 2009 to 2020 were reviewed. Their demographics, operation-related characteristics, and postoperative outcomes were evaluated.
RESULTS: In total, 46 patients with a mean age of 64.9 years (range, 44-85 years) were analyzed. An average size of defects was 129.6 cm2 (range, 8-900 cm2 ). The most frequently involving anatomical subunit was scrotum, followed by suprapubic area and penile shaft. Twenty-six patients had defects spanning multiple subunits. The most commonly used reconstruction methods for each anatomical subunit were internal pudendal artery perforator (IPAP) flaps and/or scrotal flaps for scrotal defects, superficial external pudendal artery perforator (SEPAP) flaps for suprapubic defects, and skin grafts for penile defects. In all but four cases, successful reconstruction was achieved with combination of those reconstruction options. No major complications developed except for one case of marginal flap necrosis. All patients were satisfied with their aesthetic and functional results.
CONCLUSIONS: Diverse penoscrotal defects following excision of EMPD could be solidly reconstructed with combination of several loco-regional options. A simplified algorithm using in combination of IPAP flap, SEPAP flap, scrotal flap, and skin graft may enable efficient and reliable reconstruction of penoscrotal EMPD defects.