Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Outcomes after Tumescence Technique versus Electrocautery Mastectomy

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Tumescence is the injection of local anesthetic and crystalloid into the subcutaneous tissue to establish a bloodless plane for surgical dissection. The aim of our study was to evaluate outcomes after mastectomy with tumescent technique compared to electrocautery dissection.

Methods

We conducted a single-institution retrospective evaluation of patients who underwent mastectomy between 2007 and 2011. The tumescent technique was performed by injecting 1% lidocaine with epinephrine mixed in a 10% ratio with lactated Ringer solution into the mastectomy flaps followed by sharp dissection. Significance testing was done to evaluate for outcome differences between the two surgical groups.

Results

Among the 134 patients, 64 underwent electrocautery and 70 underwent tumescent-assisted dissection. The overall complication rate was 21.6% (tumescent, 20.0%; electrocautery, 23.4%, P = 0.63). Flap necrosis requiring operative debridement was the most common complication in the tumescent group (n = 6). On multivariate analysis, tumescent technique was not associated with an increased complication rate. Immediate reconstruction was the only factor that increased the risk of complication (odds ratio 12.95, P < 0.001).

Conclusions

The tumescence surgery technique should be utilized with caution in patients undergoing immediate reconstruction, as a trend for higher complication rates was observed in these cases, and flap viability is particularly important in this setting. Future prospective studies are needed to further evaluate blood loss, operative time, postoperative pain, and duration of drainage catheters after tumescent mastectomy technique.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Staradub V, Morrow M. Modified radical mastectomy with knife technique. Arch Surg. 2002;137:105–10.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Miller E, Paull DE, Morrissey K, Cortese A, Nowak E. Scalpel versus electrocautery in modified radical mastectomy. Am Surg. 1988;54:284–6.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Chau JK, Dzigielewski P, Mlynarek A, et al. Steel scalpel versus electrocautery blade: comparison of cosmetic and patient satisfaction outcomes of different incision methods. J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;38:427–33.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lantis JC II, Durville FM, Connolly R, Schwaitzberg SD. Comparison of coagulation modalities in surgery. J Laparoendosc Adv Surg Tech A. 1998;8:318–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kurtz SB, Frost DB. A comparison of two surgical techniques for performing mastectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1995;21:143–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Robertson RD, Bond P, Wallace B, Shewmake K, Cone J. The tumescent technique to significantly reduce blood loss during burn surgery. Burns. 2001;27:835–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Cartotto R, Musgrave MA, Beveridge M, Fish J, Gomez M. Minimizing blood loss in burn surgery. J Trauma. 2000;49:1034–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Klein JA. The tumescent technique for liposuction surgery. Am J Cosmet Surg. 1987;4:263–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Klein JA. Tumescent technique for local anesthesia improves safety of large-volume liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1993;92:1085–98.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kucera IJ, Lambert TJ, Klein JA, Watkins RG, Hoover JM, Kaye AD. Liposuction: contemporary issues for the anesthesiologist. J Clin Anesth. 2006;18:379–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Shoher A, Hekier R, Lucci A. Mastectomy performed with scissors following tumescent solution injection. J Surg Oncol. 2003;83:191–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Chun YS, Verma K, Rosen H, et al. Use of tumescent mastectomy technique as a risk factor for native breast skin flap necrosis following immediate breast reconstruction. Am J Surg. 2011;201:160–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Seth AK, Hirsch EM, Fine NA, et al. Additive risk of tumescent technique in patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;3041–6.

  14. Narita M, Sakano S, Okamoto S, Uemoto S, Yamamoto M. Tumescent local anesthesia in inguinal herniorrhapy with a Prolene hernia system: original technique and results. Am J Surg. 2009;198:e27–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Memetoglu ME, Kurtcan S, Kalkan A, Ozel D. Combination technique of tumescent anesthesia during endovenous laser therapy of saphenous vein insufficiency. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2010;11:774–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nisar A, Shabbir J, Tubassam MA, et al. Local anaesthetic flush reduces postoperative pain and haematoma formation after great saphenous vein stripping—a randomized controlled trial. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2006;31:325–31.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Pronk P, Gauw SA, Mooij MC, et al. Randomised controlled trial comparing sapheno-femoral ligation and stripping of the great saphenous vein with endovenous laser ablation (980 nm) using local tumescent anaesthesia: one year results. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2010;40:649–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Rasmussen LH, Bjoern L, Lawaetz M, Blemings A, Lawaetz B, Eklof B. Randomized trial comparing endovenous laser ablation of the great saphenous vein with high ligation and stripping in patients with varicose veins: short-term results. J Vasc Surg. 2007;46:308–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Porter KA, O’Connor S, Rimm E, Lopez M. Electrocautery as a factor in seroma formation following mastectomy. Am J Surg. 1998;176:8–11.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Habbema L. Efficacy of tumescent local anesthesia with variable lidocaine concentration in 3430 consecutive cases of liposuction. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;62:988–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Klein JA. Anesthesia for liposuction in dermatologic surgery. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 1988;14:1124–32.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sheridan RL, Szyfelbin SK. Staged high-dose epinephrine clysis is safe and effective in extensive tangential burn excisions in children. Burns. 1999;25:745–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

All authors report no financial disclosures

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Andrea M. Abbott MD, MS, Benjamin T. Miller MD & Todd M. Tuttle MD, MS

Authors
  1. Andrea M. Abbott MD, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Benjamin T. Miller MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Todd M. Tuttle MD, MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Todd M. Tuttle MD, MS.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Abbott, A.M., Miller, B.T. & Tuttle, T.M. Outcomes after Tumescence Technique versus Electrocautery Mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol 19, 2607–2611 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2304-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2304-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation