Evaluation of the effects of silicone implants on the breast parenchyma

Breast Reconstruction- Developing a Volumetric Outcome Algorithm

Postoperative loss of breast volume represents a significant parameter for outcome evaluation of breast reconstruction. Breast volume broadly varies- depending of reconstruction method as well as surgical differences. A structural pattern of breast volume loss provides an essential parameter for preoperative design, helps to reduce postoperative breast asymmetry rate and thereby the need for reoperation. Therefore we hereby compare volume change of the three main reconstruction techniques: autologous flap-based, prosthesis-based and autologous fat transplantation breast reconstruction. 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 .

Factors Affecting Lower-pole Stretch after Breast Augmentation

Breast augmentation surgical planning based on soft-tissue characteristics including the type of lower-pole pocket direction has been described. Objective outcome measures of the effects of some of these choices on postoperative lower-pole settling, including dual-plane dissection type, have been lacking.

Relation Between Post-Augmentation Parenchymal Atrophy and Local Tissue Pressure

BACKGROUND

Breast parenchyma interacts dynamically with an inserted implant, which may lead to local atrophy and sensory involvement, changes in vascular tissue and lactation, and volume reduction over time. The inversely proportional relationship between pressure and volume cannot be stated with certainty; that is, the larger implants having more local pressure would lead to compression, thus leading to atrophy of parenchyma more intensely compared with smaller implants. The objective of this study was to assess and list breast parenchyma volume changes with different pressure levels due to silicone implants of several sizes.

OBJECTIVES

The authors sought to list the pressure exerted by silicone implants and the atrophy caused in the breast tissue.

METHODS

Thirty-six women were placed in 3 groups (n = 12) and subjected to augmentation mammoplasty in the subglandular plane. The measurement of pressure in millimeters of mercury was conducted with help of molds with the same base and projection of implants introduced posteriorly. MRI was conducted in all participants in the preoperative period and at 6 and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Twelve months after breast implant insertion, the groups had a significant glandular volume reduction (mean, 12.97% in the right breast and 12.42% in the left breast). There was a statistically significant difference in the proportions of volume reduction and the pressure levels measured.

CONCLUSIONS

A reduction in breast volume was verified. This reduction was also related to the level of pressure exerted on the implant.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Quantitative Analysis of Nipple to Inframammary Fold Distance Variation in Tuberous Breast Augmentation: Is there a Progressive Lower Pole Expansion?

INTRODUCTION

In patients with short nipple to inframammary fold (N-IMF) distance, as in tuberous breast, the cohesivity and gel distribution of shaped implants work as a controlled tissue expander, progressively adapting the tissues to the implant's shape. This phenomenon translates into a gradual increase of the N-IMF distance over time, but the true extent to which this occurs has not been quantified to date. This study aims to quantify the postoperative variation of the N-IMF distance in tuberous breast treated with shaped cohesive silicone breast implants.

METHODS

We did a retrospective review of a prospective maintained database of all consecutive patients with bilateral Groulleau I and II tuberous breasts who underwent primary breast augmentation between April 2017 and May 2018 at our institution. To quantify the lower mammary pole's morphological changes, we evaluated the N-IMF distance under maximal stretch as an endpoint. We recorded this value at time 0 (preoperative), immediate post-op (equivalent to the distance planned preoperatively) and at month 1, month 6 and 1-year post-op. Then we calculated the average N-IMF distance variation of our sample of patients with a 99% interval of confidence for each breast obtained. Comparisons were performed using the Sign test and the Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

The average implant weight was 353g (range 290-450; SD ±46.147). Of the 54 breasts analyzed, the immediate post-op N-IMF distance was on average 2.43 cm longer than the preop IMF with a 99% confidence interval between 2.01 and 2.86 and SD of ±1.22. The mean difference between the preop N-IMF distance and after 1, 6 and 12 months was respectively 2.78 cm (SD,1.56) (99% CI, 2.24-3.34), 3.08 cm (SD, 1.57) (99% CI, 2.53-3.64), and 3.36 (1.55) (99% CI, 2.82-3.91) Comparing immediate postoperative nipple to inframammary fold distance (N-IMF) to the 1, 6 and 12 months N-IMF values, an average of 4.23% (CI 1.3-7.16), 7.74% (CI 4.25-11.23) and 10.84% (CI 7.21-14.49) of skin length, was gained respectively. According to implants' weight, subgroup analysis showed that implants > 400 g were associated with significantly higher N-IMF distance increase (p <0.05) compared to implants < 400 g.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that a significant progressive postoperative increase in N-IMF distance should be expected in all cases of tuberous breast augmentation with anatomical implants over a 1 year period. This aspect may have an important implication on the IMF incision and the new fold position preoperative planning. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV.

A Prospective Study of Breast Morphological Changes and the Correlative Factors After Periareolar Dual-Plane Augmentation Mammaplasty with Anatomic Implant

BACKGROUND

Dual-plane breast augmentation is a popular cosmetic procedure. However, objective evaluations on the effects of dual-plane breast augmentation on breast morphology are lacking. This study evaluated the breast morphological changes and correlative factors after dual-plane anatomic implant augmentation with a periareolar incision via a Vectra 3-dimensional (3D) scanning technique.

METHODS

The dynamic changes in linear distance, breast projection, nipple position, and breast volume and surface over time (preoperatively; 1 month, 3 months, 6 months, and 12 months after surgery) were analyzed in 21 patients with the Vectra 3D scanning technique. In another group of 65 patients, the influence of the implant parameters and tissue characteristics of the patients on breast morphological changes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The breast measurements changed significantly up to 6 months postoperatively and remained stable thereafter. The inframammary fold dropped by 0.8 cm at 1 month postoperatively and by 0.5 cm in the following 11 months. The preoperative implant volume and a lower pole skin elasticity lead to an increase in the nipple-to-inframammary fold distance. Compared with the expected values, the final volume was 10.9% smaller, and the projection was 25% smaller. Both the reduced volume and projection were correlated with the implant parameters and preoperative values. The nipple level was slightly elevated by approximately 0.8 cm.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides objective information regarding the breast morphological changes and correlative factors after dual-plane breast augmentation. These information may help to further understand the operation effects of dual-plane breast augmentation and to guide medical practice.

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 .

Surgical Management of the Explant Patient: An Update on Options for Breast Contouring and Volume Restoration

BACKGROUND

Breast implant removal is becoming a common procedure in light of the current events and controversies with silicone breast implants. The authors believe strongly in informing patients about the indications and options regarding both explantation and the management of the secondary breast deformity.

METHODS

Relevant literature regarding the management of the explant patient was reviewed and organized to provide an update on prior publications addressing the explant patient population.

RESULTS

Surgical management options after implant removal include breast contouring and volume restoration. Fat augmentation has been used in both aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors review the surgical management for explantation, breast contouring, and autologous fat grafting for volume restoration. In the explant patient, autologous fat grafting serves as a reliable option for volume restoration.

Anthropometric Aspects in the Breast Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Studies have demonstrated the importance of anthropometric measurements of the breasts, based on linear measurements for the selection of the volume of breast implants, their positioning, and surgical planning.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to evaluate the main changes in anthropometric measurements in breast augmentation.

METHODS

A prospective, randomized clinical study with 74 female candidates for breast augmentation. All the individuals were split into five groups, according to the implant volume. The implants used were of different textures, from three different brands (LifeSil, Politech, and Silimed). The following measures were taken: distance from the nipple to the inframammary fold (N-IMF), inter-nipple-areolar complex distance (N-N), distance from the Sternal notch to the Nipple (SN-N), areola diameter, and breast projection.

RESULTS

The most significant breast anthropometric alteration after mammoplasty was the N-IMF distance; that is, an expansion of the lower pole of the breast, followed by an increase in the areolar diameter. Mostly of measurements showed stability between 3rd and 6th months after the surgery. The projection was the most interesting measure due to presenting two patterns of behavior according to the analysis criteria performed. When comparing the implant projection and the final breast projection, it was observed that the implant profile represented a 27% increase in the final breast projection.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an essential comparative analysis between anthropometric changes in breast augmentations and serves as a predictive tool in the preoperative evaluation of the patient during surgical planning.

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 .

Effects of Silicone Implants on the Mammary Gland: Ultrasonographic and 3D Study

BACKGROUND

Breast implants may be responsible for secondary deformities produced by parenchymal atrophy. However, few studies in the literature have reported changes in breast tissue after augmentation surgery. In this study, the breast thickness of patients undergoing breast augmentation was monitored by ultrasound, and correlations with surface, volume and projection measurements were examined.

METHODS

We studied the parenchymal thickness at the lower pole of the breast with ultrasound in 36 women (72 breasts). In another group of 33 patients (66 breasts), we studied the thickness at the upper and lower poles along the meridian of each breast by ultrasound and measured the anthropometric metrics, volume and projection of the breast with a 3D camera.

RESULTS

Midline measurements close to the areola showed reduced thickness at the lower pole, with 31.8% at the midpoint of the lower pole and 42% at the infra-areolar level (p < 0.0001). At the upper pole, there was a decrease of 14.6% (p < 0.001), but the thickness was increased by 6% and 38% at more cranial levels. No correlations with volume were found. Anatomical implants produced more atrophy at the lower pole, and round implants at the upper pole. More atrophy was found with subfascial than submuscular augmentation. Compared with the expected values, the final volume was very similar, but the projection was 29% less. Surface measurements changed significantly up to 4 months postoperatively and remained stable thereafter.

CONCLUSIONS

Implants affect significatively the thickness of the glandular tissue. All changes occur very soon postoperatively but stabilize after 4 months.

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 .

Functional and Volumetric Analysis of the Pectoralis Major Muscle After Submuscular Breast Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Dual plane breast augmentation is a technical variation of the submuscular plane described as a technique that reduces contour deformities due to contraction of the pectoralis major muscle and lower risk of double-bubble deformity associated with breast ptosis. Despite improvement in the aesthetic aspect, there is still no consensus whether this technique affects the function of the pectoralis major muscle.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to correlate functional with volumetric changes associated with dissection of the muscle origin in submuscular breast augmentation.

METHODS

Thirty women who desired to undergo breast augmentation were selected prospectively and randomly allocated to 2 groups: 10 patients in the control group and 20 patients in the interventional group, who underwent submuscular breast augmentation. Magnetic resonance imaging and volumetric software were used to assess muscle volume and isokinetic dynamometry was used to assess function of the pectoralis major muscle. Preoperative measurements were compared with those at 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery.

RESULTS

Magnetic resonance imaging revealed significant decrease in muscle volume at 6 and 12 months follow-up. The isokinetic test conducted during adduction showed a significant difference in muscle strength between groups from baseline to the 12-month follow-up, and between the 3- and 12-month follow-up. No significant differences in muscle strength during abduction were observed from baseline to the 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Submuscular breast augmentation reduced muscle strength during adduction 12 months after surgery, but without a significant correlation with volumetric muscle loss.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 2