{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027253668763102725, 'fraction_numerical': 0.017470300489168415, 'mean_word_length': 5.479638009049774, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparing reduction mammaplasty specimens between superior and central pedicle techniques: a retrospective study

The aim of this study was to evaluate the histologic diagnoses of the reduction mammaplasty specimens in two retrospective series of patients operated using superior and central pedicle mammaplasties. Between November 2000 and December 2011, 60 consecutive patients (120 breasts) underwent breast reduction using the superior pedicle technique with a vertical scar (Lejour’s technique). These patients were compared with another series of 80 patients (150 breasts) who underwent breast reduction using a vertical scar mammaplasty with a central pedicle (Copcu’s technique). The characteristics of the patients were statistically similar between the two groups. Therefore, 140 patients who had undergone reduction mammaplasty were analyzed with respect to their histologic diagnoses, age, and specimen’s weight. In the superior pedicle technique, we found that 30% of these women had pathologic alterations in at least one of their breasts, whereas the pathologic changes in patients who underwent Copcu’s technique were 35%. In terms of tumor diagnosis, the upper quadrant excision technique (e.g. Copcu’s method) may be safer. If there is no other special condition, it is better to use the pedicle technique in which the upper lateral and upper medial pole is removed. Level of Evidence: Level I, therapeutic study.