Erschienen in:
17.05.2019 | Original Article
Implant Insertion Time and Incision Length in Breast Augmentation Surgery with the Keller Funnel: Results from a Comparative Study
verfasst von:
Paolo Montemurro, Sebastian Fischer, Sybille Schyllander, Patrick Mallucci, Per Hedén
Erschienen in:
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
|
Ausgabe 4/2019
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten
Abstract
Background
The Keller funnel is an easy-to-use mechanical device that aids breast implant insertion. This study analyzed implant insertion time and incision length using the Keller funnel versus conventional manual insertion.
Methods
This was an analysis of two cohorts of adult patients undergoing primary breast augmentation with anatomical implants at a single center. In the ‘insertion time cohort’ (N = 20), implants were inserted with a Keller funnel on one side and manually on the other; follow-up lasted 4 years. In the ‘incision length cohort,’ both implants were inserted with a Keller funnel (N = 50) or manually (N = 50), with follow-up lasting 12 months.
Results
In the insertion time cohort, mean total insertion time (from implant sterile-package opening to final positioning in the pocket) was 35 s (range 13–76 s) with the Keller funnel and 25 s (range 13–43 s) using manual insertion (p = 0.07); the mean time needed to push the implant through the incision was 6 s (range 3–10 s) with the Keller funnel and 16 s (range 13–40 s) with manual insertion (p = 0.04). In the incision length cohort, mean incision length was shorter with the Keller funnel versus manual insertion (35.5 ± 2.1 mm vs. 46.2 ± 3.2 mm; p < 0.001). There were no differences in complications based on insertion method.
Conclusion
The Keller funnel was associated with decreased incision length and reduced time to push the implant through the incision. This brings potential clinical advantages in minimizing scarring and reducing contamination of the device.
Level of Evidence III
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.