Recurrent 8-Year Ongoing Unilateral Breast Seroma Formation after PIP Implant Removal-A Case Report and Review of the Literature

An unusual case of late hematoma after implant-based breast reconstruction mimicking an anaplastic large cell lymphoma: a case report and literature review

Late hematoma associated with breast implants used in esthetic and reconstructive breast surgery represents a rare entity. These hematomas do not have a clear etiology, but triggering events like trauma, anticoagulant use, capsule contracture, or chronic inflammation are reported in literature. We describe an 82-year-old patient who developed a unilateral intra-capsular hematoma 19 years after mastectomy and breast reconstruction with McGhan 445 g implant. Differential diagnosis with anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) was considered and potential causes of hematoma were evaluated. Constant pressure forces on chest wall were defined as pathophysiological cause. A systematic literature review concerning late hematoma cases was carried out, focusing on late hematoma etiology and various surgical treatments.

Level of evidence: Level V, diagnostic study.

Epidemiology and Prevention of Breast Prosthesis Capsular Contracture Recurrence

INTRODUCTION

Baker grade III and IV breast prosthesis capsular contractures represent a major problem for patients undergoing mammoplasties. The risk factors involved in recurrence are debated, and the best surgical approach for their prevention is not established. The objective was to identify these.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a retrospective study of patients operated on for capsular contracture at the Saint-Louis Hospital in Paris from 2012 to 2014. The characteristics at inclusion were compared so as to determine the risk factors of recurrence. The surgical approaches were compared between the patients with recurrence and those without at 5 years.

RESULTS

Of the 100 patients included, 24 had a recurrence. The minimal follow-up was 5 years. No risk factors of recurrence of capsular contracture were identified. The surgical approach associated with the lowest rate of recurrence was anterior capsulectomy [OR total capsulectomy = 2.36 (0.73; 8.037) OR capsulotomy = 4.33 (1.37; 14.81)] (p < 0.040) with alteration of the volume of the implant, whether greater or less than initially [OR greater volume = 0.30 (0.096; 0.83); OR smaller volume = 0.14 (0.008; 0.85)] (p < 0.018).

CONCLUSION

The occurrence of capsular contracture is a major problem with prosthetic breast surgery. The main risk factors identified to date are essentially in regard to the occurrence of a first episode. No significant risk factors for recurrence were identified. The best prevention appears to be an anterior capsulectomy with reducing the volume of the implant.

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 . IV.

Complication of Ruptured Poly Implant Prothèse® Breast Implants Combined with AQUAfilling® Gel Injection: A Case Report and Literature Review

INTRODUCTION

We describe the first case of a patient who received AQUAfilling^® gel (Biomedica, Prague, Czech Republic) after augmentation with Poly Implant Prothèse^® (PIP) breast implants and later developed breast deformity with bilateral implant rupture.

CASE REPORT

A 49-year-old Korean female patient who received breast augmentation with PIP implants 18 years ago and subsequent insertion of AQUAfilling^® gel 1 year ago visited our center with a chief complaint of pain and decreased implant sizes in both breasts. Breast implant and foreign body removal operation was performed for both breasts under general anesthesia. Intraoperative gross findings, pathologic findings, and tissue culture results were analyzed.

RESULTS

Our diagnosis included rupture of the implants in both breasts with leakage of injected material resulting in inflammation of the pericapsular area and pectoralis muscle. The intraoperative gross findings and results of the pathologic report showed that the implants were exposed with massive leakage of AQUAfilling^® gel in the pericapsular space, and the pectoralis major was mixed with AQUAfilling^® gel-like liquid and tissue with an inflammatory reaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Surgeons should be careful in performing AQUAfilling^® gel injection for breast augmentation, especially when combined with breast implant insertion. AQUAfilling^® gel itself is not yet proven safe in the long term, so more research on this topic is warranted. Additionally, surgeons should be aware of the comparatively high risk of implant rupture and foreign body reaction with PIP implants, and warn patients accordingly.

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 .