Five-Year Safety and Satisfaction With the Lightweight Breast Implant

Artificial Intelligence, Genuine Outcome: Analysis of 72 Consecutive Cases of Subfascial Augmentation Mastopexy With Smooth Round Implants Supported by P4HB Scaffold

BACKGROUND

Ptosis recurrence often leads to unsatisfactory results after mastopexy, even more so when additional stress is provided by implants on compromised native tissue. The poly-4-hydroxybutyrate(P4HB) scaffold (GalaFLEX) with its favorable safety profile and proven long-term mechanical strength represents a preferred option for soft tissue support.

OBJECTIVES

The primary endpoint was assessment of lower pole stretch from the early postoperative period up to 3 years.

METHODS

Out of 151 patients who underwent surgery by G.B. from March 2020 to December 2023, a total of 72 with a 12-month-mininum follow-up who had primary (46) or secondary (26) augmentation mastopexy with subfascial round smooth implants and P4HB scaffold support were included in the study. Three-dimensional artificial intelligence software was utilized for all measurements. Further analysis included evaluation of ptosis recurrence and all complications.

RESULTS

No recurrent ptosis, bottoming out, implant displacement, or capsular contracture was reported during follow-up (mean, 24.8 months). The lower pole arch's elongation was 8.04% and 9.44% at 1 and 3 years respectively, comparing favorably with previous reports. Statistically significant correlation (P < .05) between implant size and lower pole stretch was noted, this being greater for larger implants (> 400 cc; P = .0011) and primary cases (P = .1376). Progressive volume redistribution from upper to lower pole was observed in the first year, with substantial stability thereafter.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the largest published series reporting long-term results (up to 45 months) in mastopexy augmentation with GalaFLEX, suggesting its supportive role in lower pole stability even in the setting of concurrent breast augmentation with smooth implants in a subfascial plane.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Types of Breast Cancer Surgery and Breast Reconstruction

Background: Breast cancer continues to be a significant diagnostic and therapeutic problem. Mastectomy is still a frequently used treatment method, but its form is changing with progress in medicine. Methods: We have described important types of surgical treatments for breast cancer, such as modified radical mastectomy, breast-conserving surgery, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, and robotic mastectomy. Breast reconstruction is also a very important element of treatment because it directly affects the mental state of patients after the procedure. We have also described types of breast reconstruction, such as implants, acellular dermal matrices, autologous reconstruction, robotic breast reconstruction, and fat grafting. Results: The aim of our study was to compare available types of surgical treatment for breast cancer and breast reconstruction to help tailor personalized treatment to patients.

Secondary Breast Augmentation: The Six Winning Moves

BACKGROUND

Breast augmentation in 2019 was the first among the top five cosmetic surgical procedures performed worldwide, according to the International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery. It is not only the most commonly performed cosmetic surgery, but also the aesthetic procedure with the highest reoperation rate.

METHODS

A retrospective observational study of 306 female patients who underwent secondary breast surgery, with a follow-up of at least 1 year after surgery, from 2010 to 2020 is presented. For patients'selection, we decided to include all patients who performed a secondary breast surgery for aesthetic reasons; only patients with history of previous radiotherapy were excluded.

RESULTS

Patients were divided into different groups according to the performed procedure (the six winning moves) and associated postoperative outcomes are shown.

CONCLUSIONS

The aim of this paper, based on authors' own experience, is to present a personalized approach to secondary breast reshaping, describing the six "winning" moves to apply, which, differently combined among each other, intend to address each specific cause of reintervention with a dedicated surgical procedure.

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 .

Lightweight implants in breast reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Since the first use of silicone implants by Cronin in 1962, there have been several attempts to introduce alternative filling materials for breast implants on the market. A promising new development are lightweight implants, whose filler material is one third lighter than conventional silicone gel. While these implants have been used primarily for aesthetic augmentation, a benefit could be expected particularly in post-mastectomy reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 2019, 92 operations using lightweight implants have been performed at our clinic, 61 of them for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. These have been compared to 92 breast reconstructions using conventional silicone implants.

RESULTS

The average volume of the lightweight implants was 30% higher than of the conventional implants (452 ml resp. 347 ml), whereas the implant weight was comparable in both groups (317 g resp. 347 g). Grade 3-4 capsular fibrosis was seen in 6 cases in both groups; revision was required 9 times (lightweight implants) and 7 times (conventional silicone implants) during the follow-up period.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the use of lightweight implants in breast reconstruction. With exception of the filler material, the implants used in the two groups were comparable in shape and surface. The inserted lightweight implants had a greater volume but nearly the same weight as the conventional implants and were used in patients with a higher body mass index. Thus, lightweight implants were preferred in patients whose reconstruction required a larger implant volume.

CONCLUSION

Lightweight implants are a new alternative for breast reconstruction especially in case that larger implant volume is demanded. The increased complication rate has to be verified in further studies.

Israeli Innovations in the Field of Plastic Surgery

Numerous innovations within the field of plastic surgery have been developed in Israel over the last few decades. Many of these therapeutic devices and techniques have been established globally with demonstrable efficacy and respectable safety profiles. This article offers an overview of recent Israeli cutting-edge medical therapeutic solutions contributing to the global practice of plastic surgery.

The Inferior-Based Dermoglandular Flap with Partial Subpectoral Implant Transposition and Revision Mastopexy for Subglandular Breast Augmentation Complications

BACKGROUND

Revision augmentation-mastopexy is a complex procedure that aims to correct the complications of a previous surgery. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the reliability of the inferior-based dermoglandular flap with partial subpectoral implant coverage to correct implant- and tissue-related complications associated with primary subglandular breast augmentation and its influence on improving outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study in which a total of 53 patients (106 breasts) underwent revision augmentation-mastopexy using the double coverage technique for an implant with an inferior-based dermoglandular flap and superior-based pectoralis major muscle (biplane) as the first layer and a nipple-areolar flap with breast pillars as the second layer. This technique provides a suspensory reconstruction that acts as hammock to minimize the pressure on the inframammary fold and maintain position integrity.

RESULTS

The follow-up period ranged from 2.3 to 4 years (mean 3.6 years), and the recorded complications were minor wound dehiscence less than 1 cm² at the "T" junction in three breasts (2.83 %) and mild hypertrophic scarring in five breasts (4.72%).

CONCLUSION

The use of an inferior-based dermoglandular flap with partial subpectoral biplane implant reinforcement allows autologous support and double coverage to decrease the incidence of implant- and tissue-related complications, especially pseudoptosis, lower pole widening, capsular contracture, rippling, and implant visibility. It achieves enhanced upper pole fullness, medial cleavage, projection, and breast volume.

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 .