Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Authors’ Reply
BRIDGING THE GAP
BRIEF COMMUNICATION
BRIEF REPORT
Case Report
Case Reports
CME
CME ARTICLE
CME articles - Practice points
COMMENTARY
CONFERENCE REPORT
CONTROVERSY
Correspondence
Correspondences
CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY
DRUG REVIEW
E-CHAT
Editorial
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
ERRATUM
ETHICAL HOTLINE
ETHICS
Field: Evolution of dermatologic surgergy
FOCUS
FROM THE ARCHIVES OF INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATO SURGERY
From the Editor's Desk
FROM THE LITERATURE
GUEST EDITORIAL
Guidelines
Images in Clinical Practice
Images in Dermatosurgery
INNOVATION
Innovations
INVITED COMMENTARY
JCAS Symposium
LETTER
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
LETTERS
Message from the President
NEW HORIZON
Original Article
Practice Point
Practice Points
PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH
QUIZ
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Resident’s Page
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
SHORT COMMUNICATION
Spot the Diagnosis [Quiz]
STUDY
SURGICAL PEARL
SYMPOSIUM
Symposium—Lasers
Symposium: Hair in Dermatology
Symposium: Lasers Review Article
View Point
VIEWPOINT
VIEWPOINTS
Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
Search in posts
Search in pages
Filter by Categories
Authors’ Reply
BRIDGING THE GAP
BRIEF COMMUNICATION
BRIEF REPORT
Case Report
Case Reports
CME
CME ARTICLE
CME articles - Practice points
COMMENTARY
CONFERENCE REPORT
CONTROVERSY
Correspondence
Correspondences
CUTANEOUS PATHOLOGY
DRUG REVIEW
E-CHAT
Editorial
EDITORIAL COMMENTARY
ERRATUM
ETHICAL HOTLINE
ETHICS
Field: Evolution of dermatologic surgergy
FOCUS
FROM THE ARCHIVES OF INDIAN JOURNAL OF DERMATO SURGERY
From the Editor's Desk
FROM THE LITERATURE
GUEST EDITORIAL
Guidelines
Images in Clinical Practice
Images in Dermatosurgery
INNOVATION
Innovations
INVITED COMMENTARY
JCAS Symposium
LETTER
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
LETTERS
Message from the President
NEW HORIZON
Original Article
Practice Point
Practice Points
PRESIDENTIAL SPEECH
QUIZ
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Resident’s Page
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
SHORT COMMUNICATION
Spot the Diagnosis [Quiz]
STUDY
SURGICAL PEARL
SYMPOSIUM
Symposium—Lasers
Symposium: Hair in Dermatology
Symposium: Lasers Review Article
View Point
VIEWPOINT
VIEWPOINTS
View/Download PDF

Translate this page into:

COMMENTARY
7 (
2
); 116-117

Gynaecomastia Surgery: Should it be Individualised?

Department of General Surgery, Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Mansoura University, Mansoura, Egypt

Address for correspondence: Dr. Wagih Mommtaz Ghnnam, 14 Gawad Hosney Street, Sherbin, Dakahlia, Egypt. E-mail: wghnnam@gmail.com

Read COMMENTARY-ARTICLE associated with this -

Licence

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Disclaimer:
This article was originally published by Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd and was migrated to Scientific Scholar after the change of Publisher.

Gynaecomastia is enlargement of male breast, and is the most common breast problem affecting men. It occurs in about 30% of middle-aged males and increases with old age due to decline in testosterone level. The first description of surgical treatment for gynaecomastia was made by Paulus Aegineta (635-690 AD), who used a semi-lunar infra mammary incision for excision of the breast tissue. Several treatments regarding gynecomastia have been described in literature, the most commonly performed procedure for Simon IIb and III stages is the combined liposuction and excision techniques.[12]

In the present article the authors described a combined technique of liposuction and excess skin removal through the mammoplasty technique of depithelialisation of the skin and later suturing the skin edges to minimise scarring but they did not add any new option to the current practice of gynecomastia treatment modalities.[3]

They should have compared their technique with other more traditional excisional procedures. In my own experience a periaeriolar small incision exactly on the margin between the skin and the areola is done and all breast tissue is excised with an excellent aesthetic scar, without requiring second stage excision of excess skin.

No postoperative complications like hematoma or infection were reported by the authors in all the 10 cases. The need for reoperation was not mentioned, although literature review revealed a reoperation rate of 4-8% of gynecomastia cases for hematoma evacuation and revision.[45]

The most common early complication after gynecomastia surgery is hematoma, which should be evacuated if possible. This prevents excessive scarring and distortion of the remaining breast. In liposuction cases, evacuation may not be possible. Under-resection of tissue is the most common long-term complication of gynecomastia surgery particularly in liposuction cases, when a residual mass of tissue is not removed. This can be avoided by using the pull through technique. Under-resection at the periphery of the breast can result from poor tapering and causes a noticeable deformity. Over resection in the nipple areola area can result in a saucer-type deformity that is difficult to correct. Loose skin is usually not considered a complication if it is part of the operative plan. Occasionally, loose skin occurs in an unexpected manner, and surgical excision is required.[678]

Surgical treatment of gynecomastia should ensure minimal scarring while respecting the aesthetic unit. The selection of the appropriate surgical method depends on the severity grade, the presence of skin redundancy and the volume of the male breast glandular tissue.

CONCLUSION

Surgery is the mainstay of treatment for gynecomastia. Although a wide range of surgical techniques have been described, the treatment of gynecomastia requires an individualised approach. Surgeons often find it difficult to choose the technique that will achieve the best results for a given patient.

Source of Support: Nil.

Conflict of Interest: None declared.

REFERENCES

  1. , , . Surgical management of gynecomastia: 20 years' experience. Scand J Surg. 2013;103:41-5.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. , , , , , . Minimally invasive excision of gynaecomastia — a novel and effective surgical technique. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2010;92:198-200.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Role of combined ccircumareolar skin excision and liposuction in the management of high grade gynecomastia. J Cutan Aesth Surg. 2014;7:112-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  4. , , , , . Classification and management of gynecomastia: Defining the role of ultrasound-assisted liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111:909-23.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. , . Surgical correction of gynecomastia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(Suppl):61-8e.
    [Google Scholar]
  6. , , , , , . Our experience with the so called pull-through technique combined with liposuction for management of gynecomastia. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;53:22-6.
    [Google Scholar]
  7. , , . Power-assisted liposuction and the pull-through technique for the treatment of gynecomastia. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121:740-7.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. , , , , , . Surgical management of gynecomastia - a 10-year analysis. World J Surg. 2008;32:38-44.
    [Google Scholar]

Fulltext Views
13

PDF downloads
0
View/Download PDF
Download Citations
BibTeX
RIS
Show Sections