Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2020

02.01.2020 | Review

Why Do We Need Anatomical Implants? the Science and Rationale for Maintaining Their Availability and Use in Breast Surgery

verfasst von: Paolo Montemurro, William P. Adams Jr., Patrick Mallucci, Roy De Vita, Craig Layt, M. Bradley Calobrace, Mitchell H. Brown, Maurizio B. Nava, Steven Teitelbaum, José Luis Martín del Yerro, Bradley Bengtson, G. Patrick Maxwell, Per Hedén

Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Ausgabe 2/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

The choice between anatomical and round implants is an important decision in breast augmentation surgery; however, both have their place and the decision between them that should be made on a patient-by-patient basis, taking into account the patient’s desires, anatomy, and surgical history. In some individuals, there are clear indications for using either anatomical or round devices, and there is good evidence that aesthetic outcomes are better with anatomical implants in some instances. When both types are an option, anatomical devices may offer increased flexibility and, despite a longer learning curve needed to properly manage them, they are associated with positive long-term outcomes and high levels of patient satisfaction. Concerns about implant rotation can be minimized with proper patient selection and surgical technique, and the overall complication rate may favor anatomical over round devices in appropriate patients. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma is an important issue, and while rare, it must be considered in the context of the entire patient risk profile. Both anatomical and round implants remain key elements of a complete surgical toolbox in breast augmentation.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Al-Ajam Y, Marsh DJ, Mohan AT, Hamilton S (2015) Assessing the augmented breast: a blinded study comparing round and anatomical form-stable implants. Aesthet Surg J 35:273–278PubMedCrossRef Al-Ajam Y, Marsh DJ, Mohan AT, Hamilton S (2015) Assessing the augmented breast: a blinded study comparing round and anatomical form-stable implants. Aesthet Surg J 35:273–278PubMedCrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Hidalgo DA, Weinstein AL (2017) Intraoperative comparison of anatomical versus round implants in breast augmentation: a randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:587–596PubMedCrossRef Hidalgo DA, Weinstein AL (2017) Intraoperative comparison of anatomical versus round implants in breast augmentation: a randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:587–596PubMedCrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Rubi CG, Lozano JA, Pérez-Espadero A, Leache ME (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:60–64PubMedCrossRef Rubi CG, Lozano JA, Pérez-Espadero A, Leache ME (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:60–64PubMedCrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Arvind M, See M, Farhadi J (2018) Can you tell the difference: round versus anatomical implants—a real-time global ballot. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:770–771PubMedCrossRef Arvind M, See M, Farhadi J (2018) Can you tell the difference: round versus anatomical implants—a real-time global ballot. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:770–771PubMedCrossRef
5.
Zurück zum Zitat Bletsis PP, Bouwer LR, Ultee KH, Cromheecke M, van der Lei B (2018) Evaluation of anatomical and round breast implant aesthetics and preferences in Dutch young lay and plastic surgeon cohort. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:1116–1122PubMedCrossRef Bletsis PP, Bouwer LR, Ultee KH, Cromheecke M, van der Lei B (2018) Evaluation of anatomical and round breast implant aesthetics and preferences in Dutch young lay and plastic surgeon cohort. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 71:1116–1122PubMedCrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Bengtson B (2011) The Natrelle 410 highly cohesive, form-stable gel implant for primary breast augmentation. In: Spear SL (ed) Surgery of the breast: principles and art, 3rd edn. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 1346–1365 Bengtson B (2011) The Natrelle 410 highly cohesive, form-stable gel implant for primary breast augmentation. In: Spear SL (ed) Surgery of the breast: principles and art, 3rd edn. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 1346–1365
7.
Zurück zum Zitat Hedén P, Montemurro P, Adams WP Jr, Germann G, Scheflan M, Maxwell GP (2015) Anatomical and round breast implants: how to select and indications for use. Plast Reconstr Surg 136:263–272PubMedCrossRef Hedén P, Montemurro P, Adams WP Jr, Germann G, Scheflan M, Maxwell GP (2015) Anatomical and round breast implants: how to select and indications for use. Plast Reconstr Surg 136:263–272PubMedCrossRef
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Hedén P, Bronz G, Elberg JJ et al (2009) Long-term safety and effectiveness of style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:430–436CrossRef Hedén P, Bronz G, Elberg JJ et al (2009) Long-term safety and effectiveness of style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:430–436CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat Hammond DC, Migliori MM, Caplin DA, Garcia ME, Phillips CA (2012) Mentor contour profile gel implants: clinical outcomes at 6 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 129:1381–1391PubMedCrossRef Hammond DC, Migliori MM, Caplin DA, Garcia ME, Phillips CA (2012) Mentor contour profile gel implants: clinical outcomes at 6 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 129:1381–1391PubMedCrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Bengtson BP, Murphy DK (2015) Ten-year results from the Natrelle 410 anatomical form-stable silicone breast implant core study. Aesthet Surg J 35:145–155PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Maxwell GP, Van Natta BW, Bengtson BP, Murphy DK (2015) Ten-year results from the Natrelle 410 anatomical form-stable silicone breast implant core study. Aesthet Surg J 35:145–155PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
11.
Zurück zum Zitat Adams WP Jr (2008) The process of breast augmentation: four sequential steps for optimizing outcomes for patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1892–1900PubMedCrossRef Adams WP Jr (2008) The process of breast augmentation: four sequential steps for optimizing outcomes for patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 122:1892–1900PubMedCrossRef
12.
Zurück zum Zitat Somogyi RB, Brown MH (2015) Outcomes in primary breast augmentation: a single surgeon’s review of 1539 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:87–97PubMedCrossRef Somogyi RB, Brown MH (2015) Outcomes in primary breast augmentation: a single surgeon’s review of 1539 consecutive cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:87–97PubMedCrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK et al (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431PubMedCrossRef Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK et al (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431PubMedCrossRef
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Hammond DC, Canady JW, Love TR, Wixtrom RN, Caplin DA (2017) Mentor Contour Profile Gel implants: clinical outcomes at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:1142–1150PubMedCrossRef Hammond DC, Canady JW, Love TR, Wixtrom RN, Caplin DA (2017) Mentor Contour Profile Gel implants: clinical outcomes at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:1142–1150PubMedCrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat McGuire P, Reisman NR, Murphy DK (2017) Risk factor analysis for capsular contracture, malposition, and late seroma in subjects receiving Natrelle 410 form-stable silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:1–9PubMedCrossRef McGuire P, Reisman NR, Murphy DK (2017) Risk factor analysis for capsular contracture, malposition, and late seroma in subjects receiving Natrelle 410 form-stable silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:1–9PubMedCrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat Hidalgo DA, Sinno S (2016) Current trends and controversies in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1142–1150PubMedCrossRef Hidalgo DA, Sinno S (2016) Current trends and controversies in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1142–1150PubMedCrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Brody GS, Deapen D, Taylor CR et al (2015) Anaplastic large cell lymphoma occurring in women with breast implants: analysis of 173 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:695–705PubMedCrossRef Brody GS, Deapen D, Taylor CR et al (2015) Anaplastic large cell lymphoma occurring in women with breast implants: analysis of 173 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 135:695–705PubMedCrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat Loch-Wilkinson A, Beath KJ, Knight RJW et al (2017) Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: high-surface-area textured implants are associated with increased risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:645–654PubMedCrossRef Loch-Wilkinson A, Beath KJ, Knight RJW et al (2017) Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: high-surface-area textured implants are associated with increased risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:645–654PubMedCrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat de Jong D, Vasmel WL, de Boer JP et al (2008) Anaplastic large-cell lymphoma in women with breast implants. JAMA 300:2030–2035PubMedCrossRef de Jong D, Vasmel WL, de Boer JP et al (2008) Anaplastic large-cell lymphoma in women with breast implants. JAMA 300:2030–2035PubMedCrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat Clemens MW, Nava MB, Rocco N, Miranda RN (2017) Understanding rare adverse sequelae of breast implants: anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, late seromas, and double capsules. Gland Surg 6:169–184PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Clemens MW, Nava MB, Rocco N, Miranda RN (2017) Understanding rare adverse sequelae of breast implants: anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, late seromas, and double capsules. Gland Surg 6:169–184PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat Nava MB, Adams WP Jr, Botti G et al (2018) MBN 2016 aesthetic breast meeting BIA-ALCL consensus conference report. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:40–48PubMedCrossRef Nava MB, Adams WP Jr, Botti G et al (2018) MBN 2016 aesthetic breast meeting BIA-ALCL consensus conference report. Plast Reconstr Surg 141:40–48PubMedCrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Cárdenas-Camarena L, Encinas-Brambila J (2009) Round gel breast implants or anatomic gel breast implants: Which is the best choice? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:743–751CrossRef Cárdenas-Camarena L, Encinas-Brambila J (2009) Round gel breast implants or anatomic gel breast implants: Which is the best choice? Aesthet Plast Surg 33:743–751CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Panchapakesan V, Brown MH (2009) Management of tuberous breast deformity with anatomic cohesive silicone gel breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:49–53CrossRef Panchapakesan V, Brown MH (2009) Management of tuberous breast deformity with anatomic cohesive silicone gel breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 33:49–53CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat Spear SL, Murphy DK, Allergan Silicone Breast Implant U.S. Core Clinical Study Group (2014) Natrelle round silicone breast implants: core study results at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:1354–1361PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef Spear SL, Murphy DK, Allergan Silicone Breast Implant U.S. Core Clinical Study Group (2014) Natrelle round silicone breast implants: core study results at 10 years. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:1354–1361PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172PubMedCrossRef Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172PubMedCrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Caplin DA (2014) Indications for the use of MemoryShape breast implants in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery: long-term clinical outcomes of shaped versus round silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(Suppl):27S–37SPubMedCrossRef Caplin DA (2014) Indications for the use of MemoryShape breast implants in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery: long-term clinical outcomes of shaped versus round silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 134(Suppl):27S–37SPubMedCrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat Martín del Yerro JL, Vegas MR, Sanz I et al (2013) Selecting the implant height in breast augmentation with anatomical prosthesis: the “Number Y”. Plast Reconstr Surg 131:1404–1412CrossRef Martín del Yerro JL, Vegas MR, Sanz I et al (2013) Selecting the implant height in breast augmentation with anatomical prosthesis: the “Number Y”. Plast Reconstr Surg 131:1404–1412CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Agko M, Hedén P (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:630e–631ePubMedCrossRef Agko M, Hedén P (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:630e–631ePubMedCrossRef
30.
Zurück zum Zitat Jewell ML (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:626e–627ePubMedCrossRef Jewell ML (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:626e–627ePubMedCrossRef
31.
Zurück zum Zitat Mallucci P (2017) Discussion: intraoperative comparison of anatomical versus round implants in breast augmentation: a randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:599–600PubMedCrossRef Mallucci P (2017) Discussion: intraoperative comparison of anatomical versus round implants in breast augmentation: a randomized controlled trial. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:599–600PubMedCrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat Montemurro P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S, Hedén P (2017) Implementation of an integrated biodimensional method of breast augmentation with anatomic, highly cohesive silicone gel implants: short-term results with the first 620 consecutive cases. Aesthet Surg J 37:782–792PubMedCrossRef Montemurro P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S, Hedén P (2017) Implementation of an integrated biodimensional method of breast augmentation with anatomic, highly cohesive silicone gel implants: short-term results with the first 620 consecutive cases. Aesthet Surg J 37:782–792PubMedCrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat Cheema M, Montemurro P, Hedén P (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:628e–629ePubMedCrossRef Cheema M, Montemurro P, Hedén P (2017) Comparing round and anatomically shaped implants in augmentation mammaplasty: the experts’ ability to differentiate the type of implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:628e–629ePubMedCrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat Montemurro P, Cheema M, Hedén P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S (2018) Do not fear an implant’s shape: a single surgeon’s experience of over 1200 round and shaped textured implants in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 38:254–261PubMedCrossRef Montemurro P, Cheema M, Hedén P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S (2018) Do not fear an implant’s shape: a single surgeon’s experience of over 1200 round and shaped textured implants in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 38:254–261PubMedCrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Lista F, Tutino R, Khan A, Ahmad J (2013) Subglandular breast augmentation with textured, anatomic, cohesive silicone implants: a review of 440 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:295–303PubMedCrossRef Lista F, Tutino R, Khan A, Ahmad J (2013) Subglandular breast augmentation with textured, anatomic, cohesive silicone implants: a review of 440 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 132:295–303PubMedCrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat Hall-Findlay EJ (2011) Breast implant complication review: double capsules and late seromas. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:56–66PubMedCrossRef Hall-Findlay EJ (2011) Breast implant complication review: double capsules and late seromas. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:56–66PubMedCrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat Spear SL, Rottman SJ, Glicksman C, Brown M, Al-Attar A (2012) Late seromas after breast implants: theory and practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:423–435PubMedCrossRef Spear SL, Rottman SJ, Glicksman C, Brown M, Al-Attar A (2012) Late seromas after breast implants: theory and practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:423–435PubMedCrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Hu H, Johani K, Almatroudi A et al (2016) Bacterial biofilm infection detected in breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1659–1669PubMedCrossRef Hu H, Johani K, Almatroudi A et al (2016) Bacterial biofilm infection detected in breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. Plast Reconstr Surg 137:1659–1669PubMedCrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564PubMedCrossRef Baeke JL (2002) Breast deformity caused by anatomical or teardrop implant rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:2555–2564PubMedCrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Montemurro P, Papas A, Hedén P (2017) Is rotation a concern with anatomical breast implants? A statistical analysis of factors predisposing to rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:1367–1378PubMedCrossRef Montemurro P, Papas A, Hedén P (2017) Is rotation a concern with anatomical breast implants? A statistical analysis of factors predisposing to rotation. Plast Reconstr Surg 139:1367–1378PubMedCrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Maxwell GP, Scheflan M, Spear S, Nava MB, Hedén P (2014) Benefits and limitations of macrotextured breast implants and consensus recommendations for optimizing their effectiveness. Aesthet Surg J 34:876–881PubMedCrossRef Maxwell GP, Scheflan M, Spear S, Nava MB, Hedén P (2014) Benefits and limitations of macrotextured breast implants and consensus recommendations for optimizing their effectiveness. Aesthet Surg J 34:876–881PubMedCrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Hedén P, Jernbeck J, Hober M (2001) Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world’s largest current experience. Clin Plast Surg 28:531–552PubMed Hedén P, Jernbeck J, Hober M (2001) Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world’s largest current experience. Clin Plast Surg 28:531–552PubMed
43.
Zurück zum Zitat Hedén P (2011) Breast augmentation with anatomic, high-cohesiveness silicone gel implants (European experience). In: Spear SL (ed) Surgery of the breast: principles and art, 3rd edn. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 1322–1345 Hedén P (2011) Breast augmentation with anatomic, high-cohesiveness silicone gel implants (European experience). In: Spear SL (ed) Surgery of the breast: principles and art, 3rd edn. Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, pp 1322–1345
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Wixtrom RN, Garadi V, Leopold J, Canady JW (2019) Device-specific findings of imprinted-texture breast implants: characteristics, risks, and benefits. Aesthet Surg J [Epub ahead of print] Wixtrom RN, Garadi V, Leopold J, Canady JW (2019) Device-specific findings of imprinted-texture breast implants: characteristics, risks, and benefits. Aesthet Surg J [Epub ahead of print]
47.
Zurück zum Zitat Jacombs A, Tahir S, Hu H et al (2014) In vitro and in vivo investigation of the influence of implant surface on the formation of bacterial biofilm in mammary implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:471e–480ePubMedCrossRef Jacombs A, Tahir S, Hu H et al (2014) In vitro and in vivo investigation of the influence of implant surface on the formation of bacterial biofilm in mammary implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:471e–480ePubMedCrossRef
48.
Zurück zum Zitat Mallucci P, Branford OA (2012) Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: analysis of the ideal breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 65:8–16PubMedCrossRef Mallucci P, Branford OA (2012) Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: analysis of the ideal breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 65:8–16PubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Why Do We Need Anatomical Implants? the Science and Rationale for Maintaining Their Availability and Use in Breast Surgery
verfasst von
Paolo Montemurro
William P. Adams Jr.
Patrick Mallucci
Roy De Vita
Craig Layt
M. Bradley Calobrace
Mitchell H. Brown
Maurizio B. Nava
Steven Teitelbaum
José Luis Martín del Yerro
Bradley Bengtson
G. Patrick Maxwell
Per Hedén
Publikationsdatum
02.01.2020
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Ausgabe 2/2020
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01595-z

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 2/2020

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 Ablationstherapie Nachrichten

Nach der Katheterablation von Vorhofflimmern kommt es bei etwa einem Drittel der Patienten zu Rezidiven, meist binnen eines Jahres. Wie sich spätere Rückfälle auf die Erfolgschancen einer erneuten Ablation auswirken, haben Schweizer Kardiologen erforscht.

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 Appendizitis Nachrichten

Schmerzen im Unterbauch, aber sonst nicht viel, was auf eine Appendizitis hindeutete: Ein junger Mann hatte Glück, dass trotzdem eine Laparoskopie mit Appendektomie durchgeführt und der Wurmfortsatz histologisch untersucht wurde.

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

23.04.2024 Operationsvorbereitung Nachrichten

Derzeit wird empfohlen, eine Therapie mit GLP-1-Rezeptoragonisten präoperativ zu unterbrechen. Eine neue Studie nährt jedoch Zweifel an der Notwendigkeit der Maßnahme.

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

19.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Ureterstriktur ist eine relativ seltene Komplikation, trotzdem bedarf sie einer differenzierten Versorgung. In komplexen Fällen wird dies durch die roboterassistierte OP-Technik gewährleistet. Erste Resultate ermutigen.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.