The role of fat grafting on contracted breast implant capsules: A retrospective comparative histological and immunohistochemical study

Technical Refinements and Outcomes Assessment in Prepectoral Pocket Conversion After Postmastectomy Radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Several studies show how submuscular breast reconstruction is linked to animation deformity, shoulder dysfunction, and increased postoperative chest pain, when compared to prepectoral breast reconstruction. In solving all these life-impairing side effects, prepectoral implant pocket conversion has shown encouraging results.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to propose a refinement of the prepectoral implant pocket conversion applied to previously irradiated patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study on 42 patients who underwent previous nipple- or skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate submuscular reconstruction, followed by radiotherapy. We performed fat grafting sessions as regenerative pretreatment. Six months after the last fat graft, we performed the conversion, with prepectoral placement of micropolyurethane foam-coated implants. We investigated the preconversion and postconversion differences in upper limb range of motion, Upper Extremity Functional Index, and patient satisfaction with the breast and physical well-being of the chest.

RESULTS

We reported a resolution of animation deformity in 100% of cases. The range of motion and the Upper Extremity Functional Index scores were statistically improved after prepectoral implant pocket conversion. BREAST-Q scores for satisfaction with the breast and physical well-being of the chest were also improved.

CONCLUSIONS

The refined prepectoral implant pocket conversion is a reliable technique for solving animation deformity and improving quality of life in patients previously treated with submuscular reconstruction and radiotherapy.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Meta-Analysis of Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Versus Autologous Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of PMRT

BACKGROUND

It is still a controversial debate that which type of immediate breast reconstruction should be operated on breast cancer patients in the setting of postmastectomy radiotherapy. This meta-analysis compared incidence of complications requiring reoperation (CRR), reconstruction failure (RF) and patient-reported outcome between immediate autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR), tissue expander/implant reconstruction mostly, in the setting of postmastectomy radiotherapy.

METHODS

Systematic and thorough research was conducted to search for studies published before August 1, 2022, by using three online databases. Studies that covered complications or reconstruction failure between two cohorts were included. To evaluate the possible bias in the included studies, the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was applied.

RESULTS

Eight studies presenting 1261 patients were enrolled. The relative risk associated with reconstructive failure favored IBBR (RR = 8.61; 95% CI, 2.84-26.08; P = 0.0001). While the risk for complications requiring reoperation was not significantly different between two groups, either include reconstruction failure (RR = 1.45 95% CI, 0.82-2.55; P = 0.20) or not (RR = 0.63 95% CI, 0.28-1.43; P = 0.27). However, because statistical definitions and methodologies vary, the synthesized result should be taken critically.

CONCLUSION

Patients with IBBR have more possibility experiencing RF compared that with ABR, while the chance for CRR is not that different between two groups. For the purpose of clinical practice refinement, more high-quality studies are needed.

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 .

Improving Decision-making in Prepectoral Direct-to-implant Reconstruction After Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: The Key Role of Flap Thickness Ratio

We report our experience in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with prepectoral polyurethane implants, with a focus on intraoperative mastectomy flap thickness compared to preoperative data (flap thickness ratio) as a reliable predictive variable of ischemic complications and reconstructive outcomes (satisfaction with breast).

BACKGROUND

The optimization of nipple sparing mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction techniques led to an increase in the popularity of prepectoral reconstruction. The aim of this study is to explore the ratio between the intraoperative and preoperative breast tissue coverage assessment as reliable tool in order to predict the risk of ischemic complications in prepectoral reconstruction.

METHODS

We analyzed 124 preoperative digital mammograms of 100 patients who underwent prepectoral implant-based reconstruction. We applied a Rancati modified score for breast tissue coverage classification, adding 4 measurements on the craniocaudal view. The intraoperative mastectomy flap thickness was measured using an intraoperative ultrasound assessment. We investigated the differences between the groups with and without ischemic complications related to the preoperative, intraoperative, and flap thickness ratio data.

RESULTS

The flap thickness ratio was lower in ischemic complication group compared to no ischemic complication group (0.4 vs. 0.8) with statistically significant differences for all ischemic complication subgroups: major mastectomy flap necrosis (P = .000), minor mastectomy flap necrosis (P = .005), partial nipple areola complex necrosis (P = .007), and implant exposure (P = .001).

Outcomes in Hybrid Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background and Objectives: Lipofilling is a commonly performed procedure worldwide for breast augmentation and correction of breast contour deformities. In breast reconstruction, fat grafting has been used as a single reconstructive technique, as well as in combination with other procedures. The aim of the present study is to systematically review available studies in the literature describing the combination of implant-based breast reconstruction and fat grafting, focusing on safety, complications rate, surgical sessions needed to reach a satisfying reconstruction, and patient-reported outcomes. Materials and Methods: We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) throughout the whole review protocol. A systematic review of the literature up to April 2022 was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Only studies dealing with implant-based breast reconstruction combined with fat grafting were included. Results: We screened 292 articles by title and abstract. Only 48 articles were assessed for full-text eligibility, and among those, 12 studies were eventually selected. We included a total of 753 breast reconstructions in 585 patients undergoing mastectomy or demolitive breast surgeries other than mastectomy (quadrantectomy, segmentectomy, or lumpectomy) due to breast cancer or genetic predisposition to breast cancer. Overall, the number of complications was 60 (7.9%). The mean volume of fat grafting per breast per session ranged from 59 to 313 mL. The mean number of lipofilling sessions per breast ranged from 1.3 to 3.2. Conclusions: Hybrid breast reconstruction shows similar short-term complications to standard implant-based reconstruction but with the potential to significantly decrease the risk of long-term complications. Moreover, patient satisfaction was achieved with a reasonably low number of lipofilling sessions (1.7 on average).