Drainage on augmentation mammoplasty: Does it work?

Risk Factors for Unplanned Reoperation during the Expansion Phase in Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction in the Dutch Breast Implant Registry

BACKGROUND

The majority of postmastectomy breast reconstructions (PMBRs) are currently performed in two stages using a tissue expander (TE). However, complications during the expansion phase occur regularly, leading to unplanned reoperations and/or reconstruction failure. This study aimed to identify risk factors for unplanned reoperation after TE placement, assessed the time until unplanned and planned reoperation, and investigated indications for unplanned reoperation.

METHODS

Patient- and surgery-related characteristics of patients who underwent two-stage PMBR between 2017 and 2021 were collected from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR). Unplanned reoperation was defined as TE explantation followed by either no replacement or replacement with the same or a different TE. Covariate-adjusted characteristics associated with unplanned reoperation were determined using backward stepwise selection and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 2529 patients (mean age, 50.2 years) were included. Unplanned reoperation occurred in 19.4% of all registered TEs ( n = 3190). Independent factors associated with unplanned reoperation were body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 25 kg/m 2 (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.63, 99% CI, 1.20 to 2.57 for BMI of 25 to 29.9 kg/m 2 ; aOR, 2.57, 99% CI, 1.74 to 3.78 for BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ), low institutional volume (aOR, 1.51; 99% CI, 1.06 to 2.18), no drains (aOR, 2.06; 99% CI, 1.15 to 3.60), subcutaneous TE placement (aOR, 5.71; 99% CI, 3.59 to 9.10), and partial pectoralis major muscle coverage (aOR, 1.35; 99% CI, 1.02 to 1.79). Age younger than 40 years (aOR, 0.49; 99% CI, 0.32 to 0.74) and delayed PMBR (aOR, 0.35; 99% CI, 0.19 to 0.60) reduced the risk of unplanned reoperation. Median time until reoperation was 97 days for unplanned and 213 days for planned reoperation. Deep wound infections were most often registered as indication for unplanned reoperation (34.4%).

CONCLUSION

This study identified several risk factors for unplanned reoperation that may be used to reduce complications in expander-based PMBR.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

It Is Time to Resolve the Dilemma and Move Away From Using Drains in Primary Breast Augmentation

Background

Breast augmentation is one of the most commonly performed aesthetic surgical procedures, yet there has been no consensus on the use of drains. While some surgeons believe in using them due to fear of complications or because they were taught in a conventional manner, the authors present their experience of performing breast surgery without the use of drains.

Objectives

To study whether performing breast augmentation without the use of drains is safe.

Methods

Anthropometric details and complications of all the consecutive primary breast augmentation patients performed by a single surgeon from 2009 to 2022 were collected and analyzed. In none of these patients, drains were used.

Results

A total of 429 (21%) patients were lost to follow-up and only those 1617 patients with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were included in this study. The mean age of the study group was 29.8 years with a mean BMI of 24.68. Mean follow-up was 16.24 months. Hematoma occurred in 15 patients (0.92%), seroma in 12 (0.74%), explantation due to infection in 3 patients (0.18%), and capsular contracture in 44 patients (2.72%). All these complications were in the lower range of complications of breast augmentation reported in the literature.

Conclusions

Unwarranted use of drains in breast augmentation should be avoided as it does not seemingly prevent the complications of breast augmentation surgery. Instead, it may increase the chances of infection, pain, and discomfort, and prolong the antibiotic coverage, and hence put an additional overall financial burden on the patient.

Level of Evidence 4

Augmentation-Mastopexy: Analysis of 95 Consecutive Patients and Critical Appraisal of the Procedure

Single-stage mastopexy-augmentation has been demonstrated to be a safe procedure. However, revisions may still be necessary. We evaluate 95 consecutive patients undergoing mastopexy-augmentation and introduce a new surgical technique for the procedure: the modified dual plane technique. In this retrospective study, 95 patients (mean age 34 ± 11 years) underwent mastopexy-augmentation between 2009 and 2019. The procedures were classified as subglandular, dual plane, or modified dual plane technique. The outcome measures included major and minor complications. A total of 19 patients underwent a subglandular procedure, 32 patients a dual plane procedure, and 44 patients a modified dual plane procedure. We observed a high overall complication rate in the subglandular group (n = 12, 63%), dual plane group (n = 15, 47%), and modified dual plane group (n = 10, 23%). Complications leading to implant loss/change occurred in seven patients in the subglandular group (37%), six patients in the dual plane group (19%), and no patient in the modified dual plane group. While we observed a high complication rate in patients undergoing mastopexy-augmentations, the modified dual plane technique was associated with a lower complication rate.

A Shakespearean Dilemma in Breast Augmentation: to Use Drains or not? a Systematic Review : Drains in Breast Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Breast augmentation is one of the most commonly requested and performed plastic surgery procedures. In order to prevent early postoperative complications such as seroma or hematoma, surgical drains could be useful. The aim is to perform a systematic review of the literature on the use of surgical drains in primary breast augmentation.

METHODS

This review was performed following the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science and Cochrane Library databases were queried in search of clinical studies describing the use of surgical drains in women undergoing primary breast augmentation with implants and documenting seroma and/or hematoma formation rate and/or infection rate.

RESULTS

Initial search identified 2596 studies, and 162 were found relevant. Full-text review and application of our inclusion criteria to all retrieved papers produced 38 articles that met inclusion criteria. Among the included studies, 16 papers reported the use of surgical drains in breast augmentation, while in the remaining 22 articles drains were not used. Only 5 studies specifically investigated the role and effectiveness of surgical drains in augmentation mammaplasty and its possible relationship with complication rate such as seroma, hematoma or infection.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar complication rates emerged from the analyzed articles, because of the heterogeneity of the studies, we were not able to demonstrate specifically whether drain use affects the rate of early postoperative complications such as seroma, hematoma and infection. Additional randomized controlled trials are strongly advocated in order to provide the necessary scientific evidence.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

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 .