Annales de chirurgie plastique et esthetique · 2018
[Radical treatment of hidradenitis suppurativa: Comparison of the use of the artificial dermis and pedicled perforator flaps].
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Gibrila J, Chaput B, Boissière F, Atlan M, Fluieraru S, Bekara F, Herlin C
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to compare the use of artificial dermal and perforator flap after radical surgery of severe axillary and perineal hidradenitis suppurativa disease.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data on postoperative outcomes, scar assessment (POSAS) and quality of life (DLQI, SF-36) were collected during consultation or by phone call. Forty-seven patients were included in our study between January 2015 and September 2017, including 27 patients in the artificial dermal group and 20 patients in the perforator flap group.
RESULTS: The quality of life assessment by the SF-36 questionnaire showed a significant increase in quality of life in both groups (P<0.05), higher in the perforating flap group (P<0.001). The DLQI questionnaire showed a decrease in the impact of MV on quality of life in both groups, which was greater in the perforator flap group (P<0.05). The scarring assessment by the POSAS patient and observer questionnaire showed a better overall opinion in the perforator flap group (P<0.001). In the perforator flap group, the total hospital stay and healing time was shorter (P<0.001) and the return to work was faster (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The artificial dermis and the perforator flaps are very useful coverage solutions after radical surgery of hidradenitis suppurativa. The use of perforator flaps, however, seems more interesting while simplifying the post-operative course.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: The data on postoperative outcomes, scar assessment (POSAS) and quality of life (DLQI, SF-36) were collected during consultation or by phone call. Forty-seven patients were included in our study between January 2015 and September 2017, including 27 patients in the artificial dermal group and 20 patients in the perforator flap group.
RESULTS: The quality of life assessment by the SF-36 questionnaire showed a significant increase in quality of life in both groups (P<0.05), higher in the perforating flap group (P<0.001). The DLQI questionnaire showed a decrease in the impact of MV on quality of life in both groups, which was greater in the perforator flap group (P<0.05). The scarring assessment by the POSAS patient and observer questionnaire showed a better overall opinion in the perforator flap group (P<0.001). In the perforator flap group, the total hospital stay and healing time was shorter (P<0.001) and the return to work was faster (P<0.001).
CONCLUSION: The artificial dermis and the perforator flaps are very useful coverage solutions after radical surgery of hidradenitis suppurativa. The use of perforator flaps, however, seems more interesting while simplifying the post-operative course.