PATIENT SATISFACTION AND OUTCOMES AFTER LIPOSUCTION AND EXCISION VS LIPOSUCTION ONLY FOR GYNECOMASTIA TREATED IN CMH RAWALPINDI

A QADEER; S HAMEED; S AHMAD; I JAMSHED; KU NAYEED; K ALAM

doi:10.54112/bcsrj.v2023i1.478

Authors

A QADEER Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
S HAMEED Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
S AHMAD Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
I JAMSHED Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
KU NAYEED Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan
K ALAM Department of Plastic Surgery, Combined Military Hospital, Rawalpindi, Pakistan

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54112/bcsrj.v2023i1.478

Keywords:

Gynecomastia, Liposuction, Periareolar Incision, Male Breast Reduction, Surgical Technique, Scarring, Patient Satisfaction, Post-Operative Complications

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of two liposuction techniques for treating gynecomastia. The study focused on patients with Simon's grades I and II gynecomastia. The two techniques were liposuction without a periareolar incision (Group A) and liposuction with an incision created near the areola (Group B). The study was conducted between 2022 and 2023 at CHM Rawalpindi and included 58 male patients. The study evaluated various clinical parameters, including skin removal, bleeding, hematomas, seromas, infections, scarring, patient satisfaction, and post-operative complications. The results showed that patients in Group B, who had liposuction with an incision, required significantly more skin removal than those in Group A, who had liposuction without an incision. Patients in Group A reported higher satisfaction and had a lower incidence of unfavorable scarring. However, no significant differences were found between the two groups regarding other post-operative complications. In conclusion, both liposuction techniques are effective for treating gynecomastia. However, liposuction without a periareolar incision offers advantages such as reduced scarring and higher patient satisfaction. The choice of technique should be based on the individual patient's condition and preferences. Further research with larger sample sizes is recommended to validate these findings and determine the optimal surgical approach for gynecomastia treatment.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abdali, H., Rasti, M., Parsa, M. A., Seyedipour, S., and Tavakoli-Fard, N. (2023). Liposuction versus periareolar excision approach for gynecomastia treatment. Advanced Biomedical Research 12.

Boljanovic, S., Axelsson, C., and Elberg, J. (2003). Surgical treatment of gynecomastia: liposuction combined with subcutaneous mastectomy. Scandinavian journal of surgery 92, 160-162.

Fruhstorfer, B., and Malata, C. (2003). A systematic approach to the surgical treatment of gynaecomastia. British journal of plastic surgery 56, 237-246.

Kim, D. H., Byun, I. H., Lee, W. J., Rah, D. K., Kim, J. Y., and Lee, D. W. (2016). Surgical management of gynecomastia: subcutaneous mastectomy and liposuction. Aesthetic plastic surgery 40, 877-884.

Klinger, M., Bandi, V., Giannasi, S., Caviggioli, F., Veronesi, A., Maione, L., Catania, B., Lisa, A., Battistini, A., and Tinterri, C. (2021). Gynecomastia: ultrasound-confirmed classification pertainent to surgical correction. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 45, 1397-1403.

Petty, P. M., Solomon, M., Buchel, E. W., and Tran, N. V. (2010). Gynecomastia: evolving paradigm of management and comparison of techniques. Plastic and reconstructive surgery 125, 1301-1308.

Prasetyono, T. O. H., Budhipramono, A. G., and Andromeda, I. (2022). Liposuction assisted gynecomastia surgery with minimal periareolar incision: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 46, 123-131.

Samdal, F., Kleppe, G., Amland, P. F., and åbyholm, F. (1994). Surgical Treatment of Gynaecomastia Five Years' Experience with Liposuction. Scandinavian journal of plastic and reconstructive surgery and hand surgery 28, 123-130.

Schröder, L., Rudlowski, C., Walgenbach-Brünagel, G., Leutner, C., Kuhn, W., and Walgenbach, K.-J. (2015). Surgical strategies in the treatment of gynecomastia grade I-II: the combination of liposuction and subcutaneous mastectomy provides excellent patient outcome and satisfaction. Breast Care 10, 184-188.

Sim, N., Tan, G., Tan, B.-K., and Goh, T. (2020). Review of the microdebrider excision and liposuction technique (MELT) for the treatment of gynecomastia. Journal of Plastic, Reconstructive & Aesthetic Surgery 73, 303-312.