Research Article
Flat Aesthetic Mastectomy Closure with the Angel Wing Technique to Address Lateral Adiposity: Technique and Outcome Analysis
Table 2
Subgroup analysis of angel wing vs nonangel wing technique and subsequent arm lymphedema development.
| | Variables | Lymphedema | | Cohort | AW | Non-AW | | | n = 51 | n = 27 | 24 | | (13.1%) | (15.6%) | (11.1%) |
| | BMI | | <25 | 6 (7.9%) | 3 (18.8%) | 3 (5%) | | | 25–29.9 | 16 (15.4%) | 5 (15.2%) | 11 (15.5%) | | | >30 | 29 (13.8%) | 19 (15.3%) | 10 (11.6%) | | | Axillary surgery | | None | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | NA | | SLNB | 8 (3.5%) | 4 (4.4%) | 4 (3.0%) | | | ALND | 43 (27.9%) | 23 (30.3%) | 20 (25.6%) | | | # of nodes removed | | <10 | 22 (7.5%) | 12 (9.2%) | 10 (6.1%) | | | 10–19 | 25 (32.9%) | 13 (39.4%) | 12 (27.9%) | | | >20 nodes | 4 (20%) | 2 (20%) | 2 (20%) | | | PMRT | | Yes | 36 (26.1%) | 21 (35%) | 15 (19.2%) | | | No | 15 (6.0%) | 6 (5.3%) | 9 (6.5%) | | | PMRT + ALND | 35 (32.4%) | 20 (40%) | 15 (25.9%) | | | Stage | | 0 | 4 (7.7%) | 3 (12.5%) | 1 (3.6%) | | | I | 10 (7.4%) | 2 (4%) | 8 (9.3%) | | | II | 14 (13.1%) | 10 (18.9%) | 4 (7.4%) | | | III | 15 (23.4%) | 8 (24%) | 7 (21.9%) | | | IV | 8 (38.1%) | 4 (40%) | 4 (36.4%) | | | N/A | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | 0 (0%) | NA |
|
|
