Microsurgical training curriculum in a gynecological breast cancer center: a benefit for patients and surgeons?
Breast reconstruction
Deep inferior epigastric perforator flap
Microsurgery
Oncoplastic breast surgery
Surgical education
Journal
Archives of gynecology and obstetrics
ISSN: 1432-0711
Titre abrégé: Arch Gynecol Obstet
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 8710213
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
29 Aug 2023
29 Aug 2023
Historique:
received:
24
05
2023
accepted:
19
08
2023
medline:
30
8
2023
pubmed:
30
8
2023
entrez:
29
8
2023
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Autologous breast reconstruction improves patient satisfaction and quality of life after mastectomy. In Germany, free flap surgery and implant-based reconstruction is usually separate between reconstructive surgery and gynecology. Cooperation between the specialist disciplines and implementation of microsurgery into breast surgeon training could enhance surgical treatment for breast cancer patients. This evaluation is intended to demonstrate the learning progress within a microsurgical training program and the complication rate in relation to microsurgical experience. At the breast cancer center at Klinikum rechts der Isar, TU Munich, a three-stage training program for autologous breast reconstruction and microsurgery for gynecological breast surgeons was developed. Between 2019 and 2022, 74 women received autologous free flap breast reconstruction by a consistent team consisting of a gynecological surgeon in training and an expert microsurgeon. Peri- and postoperative data were collected to analyze the feasibility and safety of a microsurgical training in gynecology. Within the training, operative steps of free autologous breast reconstruction were increasingly taken over by the gynecological surgeon in training. The analysis showed a decrease in operating times with consistently low complication rates during the training. This study demonstrated that a training in free autologous breast reconstruction for gynecological surgeons is safely feasible through close cooperation between gynecological and reconstructive surgery.
Identifiants
pubmed: 37644236
doi: 10.1007/s00404-023-07198-z
pii: 10.1007/s00404-023-07198-z
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Erdmann F, Spix C, Katalinic A et al. (2021) Krebs in Deutschland für 2017/2018. Robert Koch-Institut
Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft (2023) Rekonstruktion der Brust nach Brustkrebs | DKG. https://www.krebsgesellschaft.de/onko-internetportal/basis-informationen-krebs/krebsarten/brustkrebs/leben-mit-brustkrebs/brustrekonstruktion.html . Accessed 03 Mar 2023
Toyserkani NM, Jørgensen MG, Tabatabaeifar S et al (2020) Autologous versus implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis of breast-Q patient-reported outcomes. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 73:278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2019.09.040
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2019.09.040
pubmed: 31711862
Wignarajah P, Forouhi P, Malata CM (2020) The past, the present and the future of UK breast reconstruction-are our practices outdated in 2020? Gland Surg. 9: 1076–1079. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs.2020.02.03
Santosa KB, Qi J, Kim HM et al (2018) Long-term patient-reported outcomes in postmastectomy breast reconstruction. JAMA Surg 153:891–899. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1677
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2018.1677
pubmed: 29926096
pmcid: 6233781
Onkozert (2022) Senior-Operateure (Mamma, Darm) - Onkozert. https://www.onkozert.de/informationen-zertifizierung/hinweise-downloads/senior-operateure-mamma-darm/ . Accessed 03 Mar 2023
Zertifizierungsprozess (2023). https://www.awogyn.de/zertifizierungsprozess . Accessed 03 Mar 2023
Deutsche Gesellschaft für Plastische, Rekonstruktive und Ästhetische Chirurgie (2022) Zertifizierung Mammarekonstruktion - Deutsche Gesellschaft für Plastische, Rekonstruktive und Ästhetische Chirurgie. https://www.dgpraec.de/aerzte/zertifizierung-mammakrekonstruktion/ . Accessed 03 Mar 2023
Streu R, Hansen J, Abrahamse P et al (2014) Professional burnout among US plastic surgeons: results of a national survey. Ann Plast Surg 72:346–350. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000000056
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000000056
pubmed: 24317250
Nguyen PD, Herrera FA, Roostaeian J et al (2015) Career satisfaction and burnout in the reconstructive microsurgeon in the United States. Microsurgery 35:1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/micr.22273
doi: 10.1002/micr.22273
pubmed: 24809735
Contag SP, Golub JS, Teknos TN et al (2010) Professional burnout among microvascular and reconstructive free-flap head and neck surgeons in the United States. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 136:950–956. https://doi.org/10.1001/archoto.2010.175
doi: 10.1001/archoto.2010.175
pubmed: 20956739
Asaad M, Xu Y, Chu CK et al (2020) The impact of co-surgeons on complication rates and healthcare cost in patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction: analysis of 8680 patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 184:345–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-020-05845-6
doi: 10.1007/s10549-020-05845-6
pubmed: 32803638
Bauermeister AJ, Zuriarrain A, Newman M et al (2017) Impact of continuous two-team approach in autologous breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 33:298–304. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0037-1598199
doi: 10.1055/s-0037-1598199
pubmed: 28201829
Mueller MA, Pourtaheri N, Evans GRD (2019) Microsurgery training resource variation among US integrated plastic surgery residency programs. J Reconstr Microsurg 35:176–181. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0038-1668160
doi: 10.1055/s-0038-1668160
pubmed: 30121053
Balasundaram I, Aggarwal R, Darzi A (2010) Development of a training curriculum for microsurgery. Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg 48:598–606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.11.010
doi: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2009.11.010
pubmed: 20053489