Американское общество гирудотерапии

Achieving Textbook Outcomes in Bilateral DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: Does a Co-Surgeon Matter?

Research article published in Journal of reconstructive microsurgery (2025)

Последнее обновление: June 18, 2026Рецензент: ASH Editorial Board
Research article — evidence reviewArticle reference
Evidence: Observational studyКлинические исследованияDeVito et al. · Journal of reconstructive microsurgery, 2025

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is essential to examine predictors of ideal outcomes in surgery. "Textbook outcomes" are optimal surgical results based on multiple quality measures. It is important that patients have access to trusted centers that consistently produce high-quality surgical outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of all bilateral Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstructions at our institution from 2017 to 2022 was performed. Criteria for "textbook outcome" were operating room (OR) time within one standard deviation of institutional average or less, length of stay ≤ 4 days, no intraoperative complications, no operative complications, no readmission within 30 days, no infection requiring IV antibiotics, no systemic complications, and no mortality. Propensity score matching was used to control for common comorbidities, reconstruction timing, and oncologic factors. This resulted in 47 matched pairs of bilateral DIEP flap reconstructions for comparison between a single-surgeon cohort and a co-surgeon cohort. RESULTS: Textbook outcomes occurred at a significantly higher rate in the co-surgeon cohort compared with the single surgeon cohort (79% vs. 57%, p = 0.025). The average OR time was significantly shorter in the co-surgeon cohort compared with the single surgeon cohort (403 minutes vs. 572 minutes, p < 0.0001), and elevated OR time was the most common reason for not achieving a textbook outcome. There were no differences in the other criteria for a "textbook outcome." CONCLUSION: Textbook outcomes in bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstruction are achieved at significantly higher rates with a co-surgeon. This is primarily due to significantly shorter OR times. Further research into factors affecting textbook outcomes is needed.

Abstract sourced from PubMed (NCBI) for the cited record. See the original publication for the authoritative version.

Publication typeComparative StudyJournal Article
Indexed MeSH termsRetrospective StudiesOperative TimeLength of StayTreatment OutcomeMammaplastyPropensity ScoreHumansMaleFemaleMiddle AgedOutcome Assessment, Health CareSurgeons

Резюме

It is essential to examine predictors of ideal outcomes in surgery. "Textbook outcomes" are optimal surgical results based on multiple quality measures.

Почему это важно для гирудотерапии

This retrospective review used propensity-score matching to compare 47 pairs of bilateral DIEP flap breast reconstructions performed by a single surgeon versus a co-surgeon team. It found higher 'textbook outcome' rates in the co-surgeon cohort (79% vs. 57%, p = 0.025), mainly due to shorter average operating-room time (403 vs. 572 minutes, p < 0.0001), with no significant differences in the other measured criteria. The study addresses surgical-team configuration and operative efficiency in autologous breast reconstruction. It does not mention leeches, hirudotherapy, flap salvage for venous congestion, or the leech secretome, so it offers no direct evidence for hirudotherapy and no defensible leech-therapy link can be drawn from this abstract.

Цитирование

Achieving Textbook Outcomes in Bilateral DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction: Does a Co-Surgeon Matter?

DeVito et al. · Journal of reconstructive microsurgery, 2025

Связанный клинический контекст

Узнайте, как это исследование связано с клинической практикой

Добавлено в библиотеку ASH: May 28, 2026 · Последнее обновление сайта: June 18, 2026

Этот сайт предоставляет образовательную информацию и не является медицинской консультацией, диагнозом или рекомендацией по лечению. Гирудотерапия сопряжена с клинически значимыми рисками и должна проводиться только квалифицированными клиницистами в рамках институционально утверждённых протоколов. Разрешение FDA 510(k) для медицинских пиявок ограничено определёнными показаниями; обсуждения исследовательского и нелицензионного применения отмечены соответствующим образом. Для индивидуальных медицинских рекомендаций обратитесь к квалифицированному медицинскому специалисту.