ObjectivesTo identify differences in skin thickening and soft tissue reactions between the linear incision technique with tissue reduction (LITT-R) and the linear incision technique with tissue preservation (LITT-P).Study designRetrospective cohort… Click to show full abstract
ObjectivesTo identify differences in skin thickening and soft tissue reactions between the linear incision technique with tissue reduction (LITT-R) and the linear incision technique with tissue preservation (LITT-P).Study designRetrospective cohort study.MethodsAll adult patients who underwent the LITT-R or LITT-P between August 2005 and December 2016 at a large general teaching hospital with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included.ResultsA total of 83 implants were included using the LITT-R with a median follow-up of 74.0 months. In the LITT-P cohort 58 implants were included with a median follow-up of 16.5 months. Skin thickening was seen in seven implants (8.4%) in LITT-R cohort and 11 implants (19.0%) in the LITT-P cohort in the first 2 years of follow-up (p = 0.024). Skin thickening in need of treatment was registered in 5 (6.0%), respectively, 6 (10.3%) implants (p = 0.100). Moreover, treatment was successful in all cases. A soft tissue reaction (Holgers ≥ 1) was noticed in 28 (33.7%) implants in the LITT-R group compared to 16 implants (27.6%) in the LITT-P group (p = 0.679). An adverse soft tissue reaction (Holgers ≥ 2) was registered in 16 (19.2%), respectively, 2 (3.4%) implants. This difference was significant (p = 0.040).ConclusionLITT-P has a significantly higher rate of skin thickening and LITT-R has a significantly higher proportion of adverse soft tissue reactions. Nevertheless, combined with the advantages of LITT-P described in other studies, this can be advocated as the preferred technique.
               
Click one of the above tabs to view related content.