-
Journal of women's health · Dec 2021
Crowdsourcing the Public's Perception and Systematic Review of Nipple Inversion and Its Repair.
- Gregory Stone, Orr Shauly, and Daniel J Gould.
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, California, USA.
- J Womens Health (Larchmt). 2021 Dec 1; 30 (12): 181218231812-1823.
AbstractBackground: Nipple inversion is a common condition seen in 10% of females. Patients often present with physical insecurities and difficulty breastfeeding and would be best counseled initially by a primary care provider. We examined the body of literature and public perception of nipple inversion to provide a patient-centered perspective of the condition and its repair. Materials and Methods: We conducted a prospective cross-sectional study surveying random volunteers using internet crowdsourcing. Studies examining the correction of nipple inversion reporting posttreatment recurrence rates were considered for systematic review. Results: Five-hundred three people were surveyed, and 398 (mean age 35.6 years, 57.9% female) were included in final analysis. Seventy-one (17.8%) have or once had nipple inversion, and 18 (31.6% of females with nipple inversion) reported resultant difficulty breastfeeding. One-hundred thirty-five (33.9%) would advise repair, and 283 (71.1%) would advise repair if unable to breastfeed. Two-hundred eighteen (54.8%) would search online for more information about nipple inversion. Forty-four studies, including 1,940 patients and 3,361 nipples, were examined for systematic review. Seven techniques severed lactiferous ducts, and 31.8% reported breastfeeding outcomes, but as a number of patients. Studies were inconsistent in the reporting of baseline patient data and outcomes. Conclusion: Nipple inversion may be more common than previously reported. The majority of people would consider surgical correction, advice someone with nipple inversion to undergo repair for breastfeeding, and consult online resources for more information. Methodological and reporting limitations of existing evidence limit conclusions regarding the superiority of operative techniques with regard to patient satisfaction and breastfeeding outcomes.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.