procedures Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Artigos Originais

    Comparative analysis of the double-circle incision and techniques with periareolar and transareolopapilar incision for the surgical correction of gynecomastia

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2007;29(9):465-469

    Summary

    Artigos Originais

    Comparative analysis of the double-circle incision and techniques with periareolar and transareolopapilar incision for the surgical correction of gynecomastia

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2007;29(9):465-469

    DOI 10.1590/S0100-72032007000900005

    Views0

    PURPOSE: to compare the double-circle (DC) technique to other techniques, with periareolar (PA) and transverse nipple-areolar (TNA) incisions, for the surgical correction of gynecomastia. METHODS: we studied the medical files of 34 patients from the Federal University of Goiás, submitted to the surgical correction of gynecomastia, from 1999 to 2004. Patients were divided according to the surgical technique used. The parametric numeric variables were compared by Tukey test. The chi2 or the Fisher's exact test was used for nominal variables. It was considered significant a p value<0.05. RESULTS: the mean age of the patients was 27.9 (+12.5) years. There were 43 gynecomastias, 34 unilateral (79.1%) and nine (20.9%) bilateral. There were 19 breasts operated (44.2%) using DC, 14 (33.6%) using PA incision, and 10 (23.3%), TNA incision. The mean drain usage was five days for DC and one day for the others (p<0.01). The suction drain was used in 19 cases (100%) of DC and two (22%) in TNA. The other patients used drains of Penrose (p<0.01). The mean surgical time was significantly larger for DC (73 minutes) than for PA (45 minutes) and for TNA (48 minutes). DC was used mainly in voluminous gynecomastias (p=0.04). The complications consisted in three (33%) hematomas in TNA (p<0.01) and one (5%) in DC; one (11%) infection in TNA; two (10%) partial necrosis of the nipple in DC; four (21%) enlarged scars in DC (p=0.04); three (16%) hypertrofic scars (p=0.08) in DC; one (2%) inversion of nipple with TNA. CONCLUSIONS: The DC was used often in voluminous gynecomastias. It was a good and secure operation, although it required a more extensive surgical time and had a larger possibility of distended scars.

    See more
    Comparative analysis of the double-circle incision and techniques with periareolar and transareolopapilar incision for the surgical correction of gynecomastia

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE