Cosmetic Breast Augmentation Using Power-Assisted Liposuction and Lipofilling: A Prospective Study

Risks and Complications Rate in Liposuction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Liposuction is a surgical procedure used to remove localized excess adipose tissue. According to The Aesthetic Society's latest annual report, liposuction is the most commonly performed cosmetic procedure. Despite its popularity, the existing literature lacks a unified understanding of the risks associated with liposuction. The aim of this study was to measure complications of liposuction. A systematic review and meta-analysis was reported according to PRISMA guidelines and registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42023471626). The primary outcome was overall complication rate. The absolute risk for individual complications was also assessed. From 2957 articles, 39 studies were selected for analysis. In total, 29,368 patients were included, with a mean age of 40.62 years and mean BMI of 26.36 kg/m2. Overall, the rate of any complication was 2.62 (95% CI, 1.78-3.84). The most common complication was contour deformity, with a prevalence of 2.35% (95% CI, 1.05%-5.16%). The prevalence of hyperpigmentation was 1.49% (95% CI, 1.12%-1.99%), seroma 0.65% (95% CI, 0.33%-1.24%), hematoma 0.27% (95% CI, 0.12%-0.60%), superficial burn 0.25% (95% CI, 0.17%-0.36%), allergic reaction 0.16% (95% CI, 0.050%-0.52%), skin necrosis 0.046% (95% CI, 0.013%-0.16%), generalized edema 0.041% (95% CI, 0.0051%-0.32%), infection 0.020% (95% CI, 0.010%-0.050%), venous thromboembolism 0.017% (95% CI, 0.0060%-0.053%), and local anesthesia toxicity 0.016% (95% CI, 0.0040%-0.064%). Liposuction is a safe procedure with low complications, of which contour deformity is the most common. Raising awareness of specific risks can enhance surgical outcomes and improve patient-physician understanding.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Fat Grafting to the Breast for Aesthetic Indications: Techniques and Outcomes in 165 Consecutive Patients

PURPOSE

Fat grafting to the breast for aesthetic indications has become increasingly popular. Herein, methods, aesthetic outcomes, and complications are reviewed in a retrospective case series.

METHODS

Female patients (n=165) with an average age of 45 years (range: 17-78 years) who underwent fat grafting to breast were evaluated. Demographic parameters, the type of procedure, the amount of fat transferred, the site(s) of fat harvest, operative times, and the patient's postoperative recovery and outcomes were recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 165 patients, 105 had breast augmentation with fat only. Of these 105 patients, 14(8%) had implant removal with and without capsulectomy, and 61(37%) had mastopexies. Composite augmentation was performed in the remaining 60 patients. The average amount of fat used was 208 cc (range: 10 to 945 cc) per breast. Forty-five patients (27%) underwent a second procedure. Of the 165 patients, 37(22%) had adverse events unrelated to the fat graft, including suture abscesses, scarring, and minor incision cite skin breakdown. Four patients (2.4%) had a complication related to fat grafting including 'lump' formation between the breast, abnormal mammograms, and the need for simple aspiration of a lipid cyst.

CONCLUSIONS

Autologous fat grafting should be considered for both primary and secondary aesthetic breast surgery to enhance outcomes. Complications related to fat grafting are uncommon. Revisional and secondary surgeries may be needed to achieve the desired outcome. Power-assisted liposuction, with vibratory infiltration of the tumescent solution, auto-infusion of fat, and Expansion Vibration Lipofilling using a closed system has become our preferred technique. Fat grafting to breast can be considered for both primary and secondary aesthetic breast surgery Complications related to fat grafting are uncommon There does not appear to be an overall increase in complications of associated mastopexy and composite augmentation LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Body Self-Perception After Breast Reconstruction in Young Female Patients Affected by Poland Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Cosmetic and social aspects of breast anomalies in Poland syndrome are not negligible. Early diagnosis and appropriate therapeutic timing may have a positive impact on quality of life.

METHODS

Females affected by Poland syndrome, who had breast reconstruction between 2014 and 2018, were asked to complete the Body Uneasiness Test and the postoperative Breast-Q. Correlation between scores was evaluated. Correlation between scores was statistically evaluated.

RESULTS

Thirty patients who had completed breast reconstruction at 20.9 ± 6.5 yo fulfilled the questionnaires at the average age of 26.5 ± 8.1 yo. BUT scores were similar to healthy population considering different age groups, with the exception of Compulsive Self-Monitoring subscale for 16-17-year age group. A correlation between Depersonalization and "Thighs" and "Legs" was present. On average, satisfaction with breast resulted 79.1%, satisfaction with surgical outcome was 94.9%, psychosocial well-being was 78.5%, sexual well-being was 75.3%, and relative physical well-being in chest and upper body was 36.9%. Global Uneasiness, Avoidance, Weight Phobia, Body Image Concern and Depersonalization were significantly correlated with lower psychosocial well-being. Avoidance was significantly correlated with lower sexual well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction in Poland syndrome can help to improve quality of life. However, general body uneasiness can affect satisfaction with the final result.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors http://www.springer.com/00266 .

One-Stage Mastopexy-Lipofilling after Implant Removal in Cosmetic Breast Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Revising unsatisfactory outcomes in breast augmentation represents one of the most challenging procedures in aesthetic breast surgery. Different techniques for revising unsatisfactory outcomes in breast augmentation have been described, which can be summarized in two options: implant replacement procedures and implant explantation procedures. Implant explantation procedures can be performed alone or in combination with other techniques to restore volume. Depending on the native volume, the shape and the elasticity of the remaining breast tissue, implant removal can be also associated with mastopexy, auto-augmentation mammoplasty or fat graft. This article portrays our series of combined mastopexy and lipofilling after implant explantation for revising unsatisfactory outcomes of breast augmentation.

MATERIAL AND METHOD

A prospective observational study was performed including all patients underwent cosmetic one-stage mastopexy-lipofilling after implant removal. Collected data included patient's age and BMI, smoking, previous scar location (periareolar, inframammary fold or trans-axillary), implant characteristics (size and location), reason why patient wants to remove the implant (capsular contracture, implant rupture, animation deformity, chronic pain, asymmetry), mean liposuction and fat injection volume, type of capsulectomy, mean operating time and postoperative complications. Cosmetic results and patient satisfaction were evaluated using the 5 points Likert scale and BreastQ reduction/mastopexy module, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 14 patients (28 breasts) were included with a mean follow-up of 11.3 months. Mean liposuction and injection volumes were 980 mL and 295 mL, respectively. Regarding breast volume, a reduction in one-cup size was noted in 100% of cases. Only one patient (7.69%) requested additional breast volume and underwent a second fat grafting session. Regarding aesthetic outcomes, the mean scores for breast volume, shape, symmetry, quality of scars, nipple-areola complex and donor site shape were 4.2, 4.2, 4.9, 4, 4.3 and 4.7, respectively. BreastQ showed an improvement of patients reported satisfaction with a median (Quartile Rank) score increase of 19 points for the "satisfaction with breast" domain (p < .00001) and a decrease of 17 points for the "physical well-being" domain (p < .00001). "Satisfaction with outcomes" median (Quartile Rank) score was 72.

CONCLUSION

Combined mastopexy and lipofilling after implant removal represents a new tool in plastic surgeon armamentarium. This technique is indicated in patients who do not desire anymore breast implant, presenting ptosis of the remaining breast gland and donor site availability. Our article suggested that combined mastopexy and lipofilling achieves satisfactory aesthetic results and excellent patient-reported outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Development of A Surgical Treatment Algorithm for Breast Reconstruction in Poland Syndrome Patients Considering Severity, Sex, and BMI

Introduction: Poland syndrome is a rare, challenging combination of chest wall and breast deformities for reconstructive surgeons and selecting the treatment can prove difficult. This study aims to help surgeons in choosing the best viable option for treatment by sharing our institutional experience and proposing a guiding algorithm. Methods: A retrospective analysis of all patients with Poland syndrome undergoing treatment for breast and chest wall deformities at a single institution between December 2011 and May 2020 was performed. Medical charts were reviewed to allow for a description of patient demographics, treatment modalities and complications. A treatment algorithm to aid in selecting the adequate reconstructive option based on our institutional experience was formulated. Results: A total of 22 patients (six male, 16 female) were identified who received treatment for Poland Syndrome related deformities. Nine received microsurgical free flap reconstruction (three Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator flaps, six Transverse Myocutaneous Gracilis flaps), two received reconstruction with a local flap (two Latissimus dorsi flaps), nine received implant based reconstruction, and two were treated with autologous free fat transfer only (17 in combination with other surgical methods). Conclusion: Free flap reconstruction with the TMG flap is a valid option for patients with low Body Mass Index (BMI), while Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator flaps should be considered for patients with a higher BMI. Autologous free fat transfer proves to be a safe and efficient treatment option in mild cases of Poland syndrome for male and female patients, in combination with or without implant based reconstructive surgery. Multicentre studies should be conducted to achieve higher case numbers of this rare disease and support clinical decisions with more data.