ObjectiveTo compare the short-term effectiveness between arthroscopic cystectomy and internal drainage combined with cystectomy in popliteal cyst.MethodsBetween March 2014 and March 2017, 56 patients with symptomatic popliteal cyst were enrolled in the study, randomized block design was used to divided the patients into trial group (arthroscopic cystectomy combined with internal drainage group, n=28) and control group (arthroscopic internal drainage group, n=28). Excluding those who had incomplete follow-up and received surgery for other diseases postoperatively, 26 patients in the experimental group and 27 patients in the control group were finally enrolled in the study. There was no significant difference in gender, age, side, course of disease, maximum diameter and grade of popliteal cyst, and associated diseases between two groups (P>0.05). The operation time, duration of popliteal ecchymosis and the middle back of calf tenderness were observed postoperatively. The circumference of calf at 1 day, 1 week, and 2 weeks after operation were measured and the differences were calculated with the measurement before operation. Lower extremity venous thrombosis was observed by color doppler ultrasonography at 1 week after operation. The effectiveness was evaluated by Rauschning and Lindgren grading criteria. And MRI was used to observe whether the popliteal cyst disappeared or decreased and measured its maximum diameter at 1 year after operation.ResultsPatients in both groups were followed up 12-14 months, with an average of 12.5 months. The operation time, duration of popliteal ecchymosis, and the middle back of calf tenderness of the trial group were all longer than those in the control group (P<0.05), the differences of circumference of calf at 1 day, 1 week, and 2 weeks after operation of the trial group were greater than those in the control group (P<0.05). Color doppler ultrasonography of the lower extremity at 1 week after operation found that the intermuscular venous thrombosis occurred in 2 cases of the trial group, while no lower extremity thrombosis was found in the control group; and the difference between two groups was not significant (P=0.236). According to the Rauschning and Lindgren grading criteria, there were 16 cases of grade 0, 6 cases of grade 1, and 4 cases of grade 2 in the trial group, and 17 cases of grade 0, 4 cases of grade 1, and 6 cases of grade 2 in the control group at 1 year after operation. There was no significant difference between 2 groups (Z=–1.872, P=0.078). Nine cases (34.62%) of the trial group and 13 cases (48.15%) of the control group still have residual cysts by MRI, the maximum diameter of which was less than 2 cm. The cysts disappeared in the remaining patients in both groups, and there was no recurrence during the follow-up. There was no significant difference in cyst residual rate between 2 groups (χ2=2.293, P=0.852).ConclusionCompared with arthroscopic internal drainage, the short-term effectiveness of the arthroscopic internal drainage combined with cystectomy had no significant improvement, and the operation time was prolonged, the postoperative complications were obviously increased.
Objective To discuss the effectiveness of breast reconstruction with dual plane prosthesis implantation or anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation under endoscopy by using prospective comparative study, in order to provide a reference for clinical surgical selection. Methods A total of 54 female patients with breast cancer admitted between January 2023 and December 2023 and met the selection criteria were selected as research subjects. According to the random number table, 54 patients were divided into trial group and control group with 27 cases in each. The patients in the trial group and control group were treated with dual plane prosthesis implantation and anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation for breast reconstruction after glandular resection under endoscopy, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two groups (P>0.05) in the terms of age, body mass index, affected side, breast clinical stages, molecular typing, disease duration, breast volume of healthy side, breast ptosis of affected side, and preoperative Breast-Q score (social mental health, sexual health, breast satisfaction, chest somatic health). The operation-related indicators (operation time, total volume of drainage within 7 days after operation, extubation time, and hospital stay), occurrence of complications, breast reconstruction efficacy related indicators (transverse and longitudinal distance difference), and the pre- and post-operative differences (change values) of Breast-Q scores for each item were compared between the two groups. Results There was no significant difference in operation time, total volume of drainage within 7 days after operation, extubation time, and hospital stay between the two groups (P>0.05). All patients of the two groups were followed up 3-12 months (mean, 6.3 months). Three patients (11.11%) in trial group and 5 patients (18.52%) in control group experienced complications, and there was no significant difference in the occurrence of complications (P>0.05). At 7 days after operation, the transverse and longitudinal distance differences were significantly less in trial group than in control group (P<0.05). The Breast-Q scores of the two groups at 7 days after operation were significantly higher in all items than those before operation (P<0.05), but there was no significant difference in all change values between the two groups (P>0.05). ConclusionFor patients with breast cancer, comparison of breast reconstruction with anterior pectoralis prosthesis implantation, breast reconstruction with dual plane prosthesis implantation has better breast reconstruction effectiveness and higher safety.