Annals of surgical oncology · 2019
The "Nipple Whipple"?! A Pilot Study to Assess the Ergonomic Effects of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Kopkash Katherine, Novak Kevin, Kuchta Kristine, Yashina Irene, Poli Elizabeth, Rabbitt Sarah, Pesce Catherine, Winchester David, Yao Katharine
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSMs) with reconstruction are believed to be more difficult to perform than skin-sparing mastectomies (SSMs), but there is little quantitative data to support this claim.
METHODS: This prospective study analyzed four surgeons performing mastectomies. Electromyography (EMG) electrodes placed on selected muscle groups on each surgeon were used to capture muscle exertion intraoperatively and a percentage of maximum voluntary exertion was calculated (%MVE). Data regarding surgeon demographics, exercise habits, musculoskeletal problems, and surgery-specific workload was collected using a questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 61 mastectomies were analyzed; 40 were NSM and 21 were SSM/total mastectomies. NSM were considered to be more mentally demanding and physically demanding than SSM (p < 0.001). When the surgeons' EMG data was analyzed as a group, there was a statistically significant difference in %MVE for NSM versus SSM at high muscle activity in bilateral anterior deltoid muscle groups and at average muscle activity for the left anterior deltoid muscle only. At low muscle activity, there was a statistically significant increase in activation for SSM versus NSM in bilateral cervical erector spinae. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed, which showed statistically significant differences at high muscle activity between NSM and SSM in the left cervical erector spinae and bilateral anterior deltoid muscles.
CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study shows that intraoperative EMGs can assess muscle activity for mastectomy operations and show a difference between NSM and SSM. This is the first study to provide quantitative data on muscle strain with NSM.
METHODS: This prospective study analyzed four surgeons performing mastectomies. Electromyography (EMG) electrodes placed on selected muscle groups on each surgeon were used to capture muscle exertion intraoperatively and a percentage of maximum voluntary exertion was calculated (%MVE). Data regarding surgeon demographics, exercise habits, musculoskeletal problems, and surgery-specific workload was collected using a questionnaire.
RESULTS: A total of 61 mastectomies were analyzed; 40 were NSM and 21 were SSM/total mastectomies. NSM were considered to be more mentally demanding and physically demanding than SSM (p < 0.001). When the surgeons' EMG data was analyzed as a group, there was a statistically significant difference in %MVE for NSM versus SSM at high muscle activity in bilateral anterior deltoid muscle groups and at average muscle activity for the left anterior deltoid muscle only. At low muscle activity, there was a statistically significant increase in activation for SSM versus NSM in bilateral cervical erector spinae. Repeated measures ANOVA was performed, which showed statistically significant differences at high muscle activity between NSM and SSM in the left cervical erector spinae and bilateral anterior deltoid muscles.
CONCLUSIONS: Our pilot study shows that intraoperative EMGs can assess muscle activity for mastectomy operations and show a difference between NSM and SSM. This is the first study to provide quantitative data on muscle strain with NSM.