Ultrasonic dissection versus electrocautery for immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction

Background Ultrasonic dissection devices cause less thermal damage to the surrounding tissue than monopolar electrosurgical devices. We compared the effects of using an ultrasonic dissection device or an electrocautery device during prosthetic breast reconstruction on seroma development and short-term postoperative complications.

Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of patients who underwent implant-based reconstruction following mastectomy between March 2017 and September 2018. Mastectomy was performed by general surgeons and reconstruction by plastic surgeons. From March 2017 to January 2018, a monopolar electrosurgical device was used, and an ultrasonic dissection device was used thereafter. The other surgical methods were the same in both groups.

Results The incidence of seroma was lower in the ultrasonic dissection device group than in the electrocautery group (11 [17.2%] vs. 18 [31.0%]; P=0.090). The duration of surgery, total drainage volume, duration of drainage, overall complication rate, surgical site infection rate, and flap necrosis rate were comparable between the groups. Multivariate analysis revealed that the risk of seroma development was significantly lower in the ultrasonic dissection device group than in the electrocautery group (odds ratio for electrocautery, 3.252; 95% confidence interval, 1.242–8.516; P=0.016).

Conclusions The findings of this study suggest that the incidence of seroma can be reduced slightly by using an ultrasonic dissection device for prosthesis-based breast reconstruction. However, further randomized controlled studies are required to verify our results and to assess the cost-effectiveness of this technique.

Breast - Mammaplasty - Breast implants - Electrocoagulation - High-intensity focused ultrasound ablation

Publication History

Received: 13 June 2019

Accepted: 09 October 2019

Article published online:
25 March 2022

• REFERENCES

• 1 Woodworth PA, McBoyle MF, Helmer SD. et al. Seroma formation after breast cancer surgery: incidence and predicting factors. Am Surg 2000; 66: 444-50
• 2 Di Monta G, Caraco C, Crispo A. et al. Collagen sealant patch to reduce lymphatic drainage after lymph node dissection. World J Surg Oncol 2012; 10: 275
• 3 McCaul JA, Aslaam A, Spooner RJ. et al. Aetiology of seroma formation in patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer. Breast 2000; 9: 144-8
• 4 Srivastava V, Basu S, Shukla VK. Seroma formation after breast cancer surgery: what we have learned in the last two decades. J Breast Cancer 2012; 15: 373-80
• 5 Yilmaz KB, Dogan L, Nalbant H. et al. Comparing scalpel, electrocautery and ultrasonic dissector effects: the impact on wound complications and pro-inflammatory cytokine levels in wound fluid from mastectomy patients. J Breast Cancer 2011; 14: 58-63
• 6 Kuroi K, Shimozuma K, Taguchi T. et al. Pathophysiology of seroma in breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2005; 12: 288-93
• 7 Odell RC. Electrosurgery: principles and safety issues. Clin Obstet Gynecol 1995; 38: 610-21
• 8 Porter KA, O’Connor S, Rimm E. et al. Electrocautery as a factor in seroma formation following mastectomy. Am J Surg 1998; 176: 8-11
• 9 Faisal M, Fathy H, Shaban H. et al. A novel technique of harmonic tissue dissection reduces seroma formation after modified radical mastectomy compared to conventional electrocautery: a single-blind randomized controlled trial. Patient Saf Surg 2018; 12: 8
• 10 Huang J, Yu Y, Wei C. et al. Harmonic scalpel versus electrocautery dissection in modified radical mastectomy for breast cancer: a meta-analysis. PLoS One 2015; 10: e0142271
• 11 He Q, Zhuang D, Zheng L. et al. Harmonic focus versus electrocautery in axillary lymph node dissection for breast cancer: a randomized clinical study. Clin Breast Cancer 2012; 12: 454-8
• 12 Khan S, Khan S, Chawla T. et al. Harmonic scalpel versus electrocautery dissection in modified radical mastectomy: a randomized controlled trial. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21: 808-14
• 13 Devassy R, Gopalakrishnan S, De Wilde RL. Surgical efficacy among laparoscopic ultrasonic dissectors: are we advancing safely? A review of literature. J Obstet Gynaecol India 2015; 65: 293-300
• 14 Law KS, Abbott JA, Lyons SD. Energy sources for gynecologic laparoscopic surgery: a review of the literature. Obstet Gynecol Surv 2014; 69: 763-76
• 15 Wang K, Advincula AP. “Current thoughts” in electrosurgery. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2007; 97: 245-50
• 16 Lyons SD, Law KS. Laparoscopic vessel sealing technologies. J Minim Invasive Gynecol 2013; 20: 301-7