Current Trends in Breast Augmentation: An International Analysis

Outcomes of whole breast radiation therapy in Asian breast cancer patients with prior cosmetic implants

BACKGROUND

As breast augmentation has become more popular, an increasing number of women with augmented breasts require treatment for breast cancer. This study aimed to assess the outcomes of postoperative whole breast radiation therapy (WB-RT) in Asian patients with breast cancer who underwent prior cosmetic breast implantation.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 61 patients with breast cancer who had prior cosmetic breast implants (prior-CBI) and underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and WB-RT between 2015 and 2020. The median implant volume was 238.8 cc, with a median interval of 84.7 months between the prior-CBI and BCS. WB-RT was administered with either conventional fractionation (CF-RT) at 50 Gy in 25 fractions (N = 36) or hypofractionation (HF-RT) at 42.6 Gy in 16 fractions (N = 25). The incidences of implant-related complications (IRC) and their contributing factors were analyzed.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 43.5 months, the 3-year cumulative incidences of IRC and implant loss were 17.2% and 4.9%, respectively. Among the four (6.6%) patients who opted for implant removal after RT, three were potentially related to RT-related capsular contracture. There was no difference in the 3-year cumulative IRC rates following CF-RT and HF-RT (12.2% and 26.7%, respectively; p = 0.120). The risk factors for IRC included a larger implant size (> 260 cc) and a higher ratio of breast tissue to implant volume.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated a favorable safety profile of WB-RT for treatment of breast cancer in Asian women with prior-CBI. The integration of HF-RT following BCS was thought to be a feasible approach.

Epidemiology of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in the United States: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Although textured implants represent fewer than 10% of implants used in the United States, the country reports the highest incidence of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review on US-based epidemiology to update knowledge on BIA-ALCL in the United States.

METHODS

Publications on US BIA-ALCL epidemiology were searched between September 2022 and March 2023 on MEDLINE (National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, MD), Embase (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Web of Science (Clarivate, London, UK), and SCOPUS (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). The US numerator was obtained by averaging the FDA MAUDE database and the PSF PROFILE registry, while the denominator was estimated from chest X-rays, and included female transgender individuals. Prevalence and risk were assessed accordingly, but the incidence rate (IR) could not be updated due to the lack of available follow-up data.

RESULTS

Out of 987 identified manuscripts, 10 were included. The US prevalence of BIA-ALCL in the literature ranged from 1:300 to 1:500,000 and the IR from 4.5 per 10,000 to 31.1 per 100 million persons per year. A mean value of 453.5 BIA-ALCL cases was calculated. From a denominator of 4,264,618 individuals, which includes all breast implant surfaces, we calculated 414,521 individuals with textured implants, indicating a textured prevalence of 109.4 cases per 100,000 individuals and a risk of 1:913.

CONCLUSIONS

BIA-ALCL IR, prevalence, and risk has increased when calculated exclusively for patients with textured devices. Although US macrotextured implants were recalled by the FDA, these findings may influence the surveillance of existing patients and the use of macrotextured implants in other parts of the world where they remain widespread.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Periareolar Augmentation Mastopexy: Finding the Aesthetic Level of Breast Lifting

Background

Ptosis and volume atrophy of the breasts are common symptoms for various ages of women and may induce a considerable amount of stress in daily life. Periareolar augmentation mastopexy is an effective procedure for such conditions, and planning the new nipple position is very important.

Aim

To provide a simple, straightforward planning and walkthrough of this operation in a journey to find the ideal level of breast lifting for natural upper fullness.

Materials and methods

From January 2019 to December 2021, a total of 193 patients with volume deflation and ptosis of the breast received periareolar augmentation mastopexy in our institute. We retrospectively reviewed data on demographics, surgical procedures, outcomes, and complications.

Results

All operations were done with periareolar incisions, and the mean follow-up period was 29.48 ± 9.11 months. The Likert scale of outcome satisfaction scored 9.02 ± 0.61. Complications were minimal, and no symmastia or bottoming out occurred.

Conclusion

We present our basic strategies of periareolar augmentation mastopexy with a slight modification of the design. We believe that lifting the nipple to 3-4 cm above the inframammary fold (IMF) (making the top of the areola about 5-6 cm above the IMF) yields satisfactory aesthetic results.

Three-Dimensional Volumetric Analysis of the Effect of Interval Time in Autologous Fat Graft Breast Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Autologous adipose tissue has become increasingly popular in cosmetic and plastic reconstructive surgery, especially breast augmentation surgery. However, the volume retention rate after transplantation significantly varies and may be unsatisfactory. Many patients need two or more autologous fat graft breast augmentations to achieve the expected effect. There are currently no studies on optimal timing between fat injections.

METHODS

We identified target patients with secondary or multiple autologous fat transplantations by inclusion and exclusion criteria and used three-dimensional scanning technology to calculate the volume retention. Patients were divided into two groups according to the dates of the first and second operations (group A: interoperative time < 120 days, group B: interoperative time ≥ 120 days). We used SPSS 26 for statistical calculations.

RESULTS

We included 161 patients in this retrospective study, with an average volume retention rate of 36.56% in group A (n = 85) and 27.45% in group B (n = 76). The independent sample t test showed that the volume retention rate in group A was higher than that in group B (P < 0.001). And the paired t test showed there is a significant improvement of volume retention rate after the second fat graft session (P < 0.001). Multivariate regression analysis showed that the interval time was an independent factor affecting the postoperative volume retention rate.

CONCLUSION

The interval time between autologous fat transplantation for augmentation mammaplasty was an independent factor affecting the postoperative volume retention rate. The postoperative volume retention rate of the < 120 days group was higher than that of the ≥ 120 days group.

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 .

A Systematic Review of Breast Implant-Associated Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Breast augmentation is considered safe, but rare cases of breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) have been reported. This study aimed to systematically review published cases of BIA-SCC, providing valuable clinical data. The review included 14 articles and 18 cases of BIA-SCC. An increasing trend in reported BIA-SCC cases was observed, with four cases in the 1990s and 14 cases since 2010. The mean age of affected patients was 56 years, and symptoms typically appeared around 21 years after breast augmentation. Silicone implants used in cosmetic procedures were most commonly associated with BIA-SCC. Implant removal was necessary in all cases, and some patients required a mastectomy. Treatment approaches varied, with the selective use of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy. The estimated 6-month mortality rate was 11.1%, while the 12-month mortality rate was 23.8%. The estimated 6-month mortality rate should be cautiously interpreted due to the limited sample size. It appears lower than the rate reported by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, without clear reasons for this discrepancy. This study highlights the importance of enhanced monitoring and information sharing to improve detection and management of BIA-SCC. Healthcare providers should maintain vigilance during the long-term follow-up of breast augmentation patients.

Breast Augmentation: A Cross-Sectional Survey of UK and Irish Aesthetic Surgeons

Background

Breast augmentation surgery is the most frequently performed aesthetic surgical procedure within the United Kingdom year on year. However, many variations exist among surgeons regarding various aspects of implant usage and technique.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to evaluate current trends and practices in breast augmentation, within the United Kingdom and correlate them to evidence-based literature.

Methods

An electronic survey of 41 questions was sent to 201 surgeons performing breast augmentation within the United Kingdom and Republic of Ireland. The survey inquired about the surgeons themselves, their practice, implant choice, surgical technique, post-op care, revision surgery, and impact of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma among several other questions.

Results

There were a total of 166 respondents, with 146 completing the survey fully, equaling a response rate of approximately 73%. Overall, there were specific trends in certain aspects such as type of practice, number of augmentations performed per surgeon per year, preferred implant manufacturer, and implant characteristics. That said, there has been a change in other aspects such as implant texture with an increase in the use of smooth implants. The United Kingdom and Ireland concur with certain internationally dominant practice preferences, including the use of inframammary incisions and post-op bra use.

Conclusions

This survey suggests that many aspects of breast augmentation surgery in the United Kingdom are approaching standardization. There are, however, some variations in practice and controversies remaining as expected. It is our belief that further standardizing this very common aesthetic surgical procedure according to evidence-based guidelines will help to improve outcomes for patients.

Comparison of Total and Nontotal Endoscopic Transaxillary Breast Augmentation Techniques: A Retrospective Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this retrospective study was to compare the clinical outcomes of total endoscopic transaxillary (TET) breast augmentation with those of non-TET (NTET) breast augmentation. For the purposes of this study, the term NTET refers to the combination of blunt dissection and endoscopic techniques, whereas TET did not involve blunt dissection.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of 119 consecutive cases of primary breast augmentation from May 1, 2020, to August 31, 2020. The primary outcomes were the number of drainage days and pain scores as assessed using the visual analog scale on the first postoperative day. The secondary outcomes were the daily drainage volume recorded during the postoperative drainage days, the presence of postoperative daily pain that required the administration of tramadol for relief, reoperation rate, and operative time.

RESULTS

The number of drainage days was significantly lower in the TET group than in the NTET group (TET vs NTET: 2.56 ± 0.57 vs 3.78 ± 1.30 days, P = 0.000). The visual analog scale score on the first postoperative day was significantly lower in the TET group than in the NTET group (TET vs NTET: 4.96 ± 0.63 vs 5.93 ± 0.93, P = 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that the major outcomes of the TET group were more favorable than those of the NTET group. Based on our results, we recommend the avoidance of blunt dissection during endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Perioperative Outcomes and Risk Profile of 4730 Cosmetic Breast Surgery Cases in Academic Institutions: An ACS-NSQIP Analysis

BACKGROUND

Cosmetic breast surgery (CBS) can be subdivided into augmentation, mastopexy, reduction, and reconstruction.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to retrospectively analyze a multi-institutional national database to investigate the outcomes of CBS and identify clinical patterns to optimize care.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (2008-2020) was reviewed to identify female patients who underwent CBS. Postoperative outcomes (30-day surgical and medical complications, reoperation, readmission, and mortality) and risk factors for complications were assessed.

RESULTS

In total, 4733 patients were identified (mean age, 40 [13] years; mean BMI, 24 [4.5] kg/m2) with augmentation accounting for 54% of cases. There were complications in 2.0% of cases. Age >65 years (P = .002), obesity (P < .0001), setting (P < .0001), and diabetes (P = .04) were risk factors for any complication. Age >65 years (P = .02), obesity (P = .03), diabetes (P = .01), history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (P = .002) and congestive heart failure (P < .0001), smoking in the past year (P = .003), setting (P = .007), and increased American Society of Anesthesiology score (P < .0001) were predictors of surgical complications such as dehiscence and infection. Multivariable analysis confirmed that chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, obesity Class 1 and 3, and inpatient status were independent risk factors for occurrence of any complication (P = .0005, .0003, < .0001 and <.0001, respectively). Additionally, multiple procedures (P = .02) and smoking (P = .005) were found to be risk factors for surgical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the positive safety profile of CBS. Healthy BMI is a protective factor, while complications were more likely among inpatient procedures. A correlation between multiple procedures and increased surgical complications was identified. Awareness of these risk factors can assist surgeons to further refine their perioperative protocols.

How Big Is Too Big? Exploring the Relationship between Breast Implant Volume and Postoperative Complication Rates in Primary Breast Augmentations

There is no consensus regarding implant size as an independent risk factor for complications in primary breast augmentation. Choosing appropriate implant volume is an integral part of the preoperative planning process. The current study aims to assess the relationship between implant size and the development of complications following augmentation mammaplasty.

Methods

A retrospective chart review of patients undergoing primary breast augmentation at the Westmount Institute of Plastic Surgery between January 2000 and December 2021 was conducted. Demographics, implant characteristics, surgical technique, postoperative complications, and follow-up times were recorded. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify independent predictors, which were then included in multivariate logistic regressions of implant volume and implant volume/body mass index (BMI) ratio regarding complications.

Results

A total of 1017 patients (2034 breasts) were included in this study. The average implant volume used was 321.4 ± 57.5 cm³ (range: 110-605). Increased volume and volume/BMI ratio were associated with a significant increase in risk of implant rupture (odds ratio = 1.012, P < 0.001 and 1.282, P < 0.001 respectively). Rates of asymmetry were significantly associated with increases in implant volume and volume/BMI ratio (odds ratio = 1.005, P = 0.004 and 1.151, P < 0.001, respectively). No single implant volume or volume/BMI ratio above which risks of complications significantly increase was identified.

Conclusions

Implant rupture and postoperative asymmetries are positively correlated with bigger implant volumes. Implant size could likely be a useful independent predictor of certain complications, especially in patients with high implant to BMI ratios.

Determining Breast Implant Prevalence: A Population Study of Italian Chest Radiographs

BACKGROUND

Current breast implant prevalence within the general population remains elusive. An accurate prevalence is critical to serve as the denominator for any assessment of breast implant-related complication. The purpose of this manuscript is to assess this prevalence in women aged 20-70 years in Italy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eight reviewers, demonstrating a mean sensitivity of 87.0% and specificity of 97.0%, were recruited for retrospective identification of implants on chest radiographs from a tertiary academic hospital in a major urban setting. Three final reviewers were selected, and they assessed all eligible chest radiographs collected between January and December 2019. The hospital-based population was compared to epidemiological data at a local, regional and national level to demonstrate homogeneity of age structures using the phi correlation coefficient.

RESULTS

We identified 3,448 chest X-rays which yielded 140 implants, with an overall prevalence of 4.1% for women aged 20-70. Implants were bilateral in 76% of cases and unilateral in 24%. They were placed cosmetically in 47.1% cases and used for reconstruction in 52.9% cases. Phi correlation coefficient found no differences across hospital-based, local, regional and national populations.

CONCLUSION

A validated method was performed to estimate implant prevalence from an academic hospital in a major urban setting at 4.1% and was used to estimate national prevalence in Italy. The implications of this epidemiologic study may reach across national borders for improved understanding of breast implant epidemiology and in predicting the total number of patients within a given population that may be affected by device complications.

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 .

Basic Strategies of Augmentation Mammoplasty in Patients with Tendencies of Pectus Excavatum and Carinatum

BACKGROUND

In this era of growing popularity of cosmetic surgeries, more women of various chest wall shapes are likely to receive augmentation mammoplasty. Pectus excavatum (PE) and pectus carinatum (PC) are the two most common chest wall deformities, and many asymptomatic patients visit the clinic. In this study, we presented various strategies for successfully performing breast augmentation in PE and PC patients without long-term complications such as symmastia.

METHODS

From January of 2019 to December of 2021, a total of 132 patients with tendencies of PE and PC received augmentation mammoplasty in our institute. We retrospectively reviewed data on demographics, surgical procedure, outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

Among the 132 cases, 71.21% were done via inframammary approach, and 28.79% via transaxillary approach. The mean implant volume was 337.25 ± 51.46 ml, and the mean follow-up period was 16.48 ± 6.74 months. The Likert scale of outcome satisfaction scored 9.13 ± 0.48. No symmastia occurred.

CONCLUSION

We presented our basic strategies of breast surgery in patients with various chest wall anomalies. Augmentation mammoplasty can benefit PE and PC patients physically as well as psychologically, to carry out healthy positive lives.

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 .

Evolving Trends in Breast-Implant-Based Procedures in Israel: A National Survey

Rare reports linking textured breast implants to anaplastic large-cell lymphoma have generated controversies regarding their relative advantage over smooth implants. To evaluate trends in implant use in Israel, we sent a seven-item questionnaire to all active board-certified breast plastic surgeons in the country. About half responded. Approximately 60% of responders reported a moderate-to-considerable decrease in both the relative number of augmentation mammoplasty procedures and the use of implants during mastopexies in the last year. Nearly 40% had switched from textured to smooth implants to some extent. More than 40% still used textured implants for aesthetic procedures, and reconstructive procedures. Surgeons with more experience demonstrated a greater preference for smooth implants. The uncertainty regarding the safety of textured breast implants has led to a partial transition to the use of smoother implants and, importantly, to a general reduction in all breast-implant-based procedures.

A South African Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Clinical Presentation and Six-Year Follow-Up

Breast augmentation is the most common surgical procedure for women globally, with 1,795,551 cases performed in 2019. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is highly uncommon, with 733 reported cases as of January 2020. In South Africa, there are less than 4000 breast augmentation surgeries annually. This case presents the first case report documentation of a South African woman diagnosed with BIA-ALCL. The patient was a 61-year-old woman who consulted the Breast Care Centre of Excellence in Johannesburg in 2015. She had a prior history of bilateral augmentation mammoplasty with subsequent implant exchange. The patient presented with periprosthetic fluid with a mass-like enhancement on the left breast. Aspiration of the mass-like fluid was positive for CD45, CD30, and CD68 and negative for CD20 and ALK-1, indicative of BIA-ALCL. Surgical treatment included bilateral explantation, complete capsulectomies, and bilateral mastopexy. Macroscopic examination of the left breast capsulectomy demonstrated fibrous connective tissue. The histological examination of the tumor showed extensive areas of broad coagulative necrosis with foamy histiocytes. Immunohistochemistry examination of this tumor showed CD3-, CD20-, and ALK-1-negative and CD30- and CD68-positive stains. PCR analysis for T-cell clonality showed monoclonal T-cell expansion. These findings confirm the presence of BIA-ALCL. The patient recovered well after surgery and did not require adjuvant therapy. A patient with a confirmed diagnosis of BIA-ALCL was successfully treated with explantation and complete capsulectomy. She was followed up regularly for six years, and the patient remains well and in remission.

In Vivo and In Vitro Fibroblasts' Behavior and Capsular Formation in Correlation with Smooth and Textured Silicone Surfaces

BACKGROUND

As the most principal complication following breast augmentation with silicone breast implants, capsular contracture is greatly influenced by surface texture. However, there have long been widespread debates on the function of smooth or textured surface implants in reducing capsular contracture.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Three commercially available silicone breast implants with smooth and textured surfaces were subjected to surface characterization, and in vitro and in vivo assessments were then implemented to investigate the effect of these different surfaces on the biological behaviors of fibroblasts and capsular formation in rat models.

RESULTS

Surface characterization demonstrated that all three samples were hydrophobic with distinct roughness values. Comparing the interactions of fibroblasts or tissues with different surfaces, we observed that as surface roughness increased, the adhesion and cell spreading of fibroblasts, the level of echogenicity, the density of collagen and α-SMA-positive immunoreactivity decreased, while the proliferation of fibroblasts and capsule thickness increased.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings elucidated that the effect of silicone implant surface texture on fibroblasts' behaviors and capsular formation was associated with variations in surface roughness, and the number of myofibroblasts may have a more significant influence on the process of contracture than capsule thickness in the early stage of capsular formation. These results highlight that targeting myofibroblasts may be wielded in the prevention and treatment strategies of capsular contracture clinically.

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 .

HISTORY OF BREAST IMPLANTS: BACK TO THE FUTURE

Modern breast implants are a staple of plastic surgery, finding uses in esthetic and reconstructive procedures. Their history began in the 1960s, with the first generation of smooth devices with thick silicone elastomer, thick silicone gel, and Dacron patches on the back. They presented hard consistency, high capsular contracture rates and the patches increased the risk of rupture. In the same decade, polyurethane coating of implants was implemented. A second generation was introduced in the 1970s with a thinner shell, less viscous gel filler and no patches, but increased silicone bleed-through and rupture rates. The third generation, in the early 1980s, featured implants with a thicker multilayered elastomer shell reinforced with silica to reduce rupture risk and prevent silicone bleed-through. A fourth generation from the late 1980s combined thick outer elastomer shells, more cohesive gel filler, and implemented for the first-time outer shell texturing. In the early 1990s, the fifth generation of devices pioneered an anatomical shape with highly cohesive form-stable gel filler and a rough outer shell surface. Surface texturing was hampered by the discovery of Breast Implant Associated-Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma and its link with textured devices. From the 2010s, we have the era of the sixth generation of implants, featuring innovations regarding the surface, with biomimetic surfaces, more resistant shells and variations in gel consistency. The road to innovation comprises setbacks such as the FDA moratorium in 1992, the PIP scandal, the Silimed CE mark temporary suspension and the FDA-requested voluntary recall of the Allergan BIOCELL implants.

Smooth versus Textured Implants and Their Association with the Frequency of Capsular Contracture in Primary Breast Augmentation

BACKGROUND

Capsular contracture is the most frequent complication of breast implant augmentation. Although studies indicate that textured implants have a low incidence of contracture, they have been associated with anaplastic cell lymphoma, which influences the choice of surface. This study estimated and compared the annual capsular contracture rate of both smooth and textured implants in primary breast implants.

METHODS

Two hundred fifty-three patients (506 implants) were evaluated from January of 2017 to July of 2019; 42.2 percent of the implants were smooth and 57.8 percent were textured. The inframammary approach was used in the subfascial (55.3 percent) and submuscular (44.7 percent) pockets. The primary outcome was the appearance of capsular contracture (Baker grade II, III, and IV) within the first postoperative year.

RESULTS

Smooth implants had a higher capsular contracture rate at 1 year postoperatively compared with textured implants, although with borderline statistical significance (p = 0.06). Smooth surface breast implants in the subfascial plane had a 4-fold higher risk of contracture than those with a textured surface in the same plane (OR, 4.4; 95 percent confidence interval, 1.6 to 12.4). However, when placed in the submuscular plane, both textures had a similar contracture risk. The rate of contracture was similar after 2 years postoperatively (p = 0.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Using the inframammary approach and a standardized technique, there were no significant differences in the incidence of capsular contracture between the smooth and textured implants. In the subfascial plane, the contracture rate with smooth implants was higher than with textured implants. However, in the submuscular plane, there was no difference between the surfaces.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCW

Therapeutic, III.

Use of Three-Dimensional Imaging to Assess the Effectiveness of Volume as a Critical Variable in Breast Implant Selection

BACKGROUND

In breast augmentation, breast base diameter has been recognized as an important variable in implant selection. However, breast implant volume also has a tremendous impact on the final result. Previous methods of preoperative volume determination have been limited to external devices in a bra. Computer-based three-dimensional simulation technology now allows the physician to effectively communicate with the patient preoperatively regarding volume.

METHODS

A cohort of 40 consecutive patients underwent routine breast augmentation with either anatomically shaped or round implants. Five methods of preoperative volume determination including the Crisalix three-dimensional computer imaging system (Crisalix Virtual Aesthetics, Lausanne, Switzerland), along with an associated virtual reality tool, were used to assess the preoperative desires of the patients. A postoperative questionnaire was used to assess patient satisfaction with each volume determination method.

RESULTS

Of the 40 patients, 100 percent were satisfied with their result; however, given the opportunity, 12 percent would have chosen a larger implant. The virtual reality tool and external sizers were shown to be the most effective in choosing an implant. The virtual reality tool was judged to be very helpful (62 percent), very accurate (78 percent), and important (88 percent) in helping patients choose their desired implant size.

CONCLUSION

Prioritizing volume as an implant selection variable in breast augmentation results in a very high rate of patient satisfaction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Preoperative MRI to Improve Aesthetic Outcomes in Secondary Mastopexy Augmentation: A Step-by-Step Approach

Background

Secondary mastopexy augmentation is challenging because of compromised blood supply to the nipple areola complex (NAC). The operating surgeon often relies on clinical judgment and may perform a more conservative elevation of the NAC to minimize the risk of nipple necrosis. Despite this, the danger of necrosis persists. In our experience, MRI with contrast has enhanced preoperative planning in both cosmetic and reconstructive cases.

Objectives

The goals of this article are to describe our use of preoperative MRI in identifying the blood supply to the NAC, evaluating dermo glandular thickness, decreasing surgical complications, and improving outcomes in secondary mastopexy augmentation.

Methods

A consecutive series of secondary mastopexy augmentation procedures performed in 2021 were reviewed. In each case, preoperative maximum intensity projection (MIP) and/or high-resolution T1-weighted contrast enhanced MRI imaging was reviewed to elucidate the blood supply to the NAC and quantify the dermo glandular thickness. The imaging was used to formulate the operative plan. Preoperative and postoperative photographs were compared.

Results

Eight cases were performed, four of which were selected to demonstrate our method using breast MRI with contrast in step-by-step approach. Patient satisfaction was high. The NAC survived in all cases.

Conclusions

Surgeons can utilize preoperative breast MRI for strategic operative planning when performing secondary mastopexy augmentation. Visualization of the blood supply to the NAC and dermo glandular flap thickness are vitally important when performing a more aggressive lift of the breast.

Level of Evidence 3

Trends in Breast Augmentation Research: A Bibliometric Analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast augmentation is one of the most demanded procedures in plastic surgery and one of the most commonly performed by plastic surgeons. However, a bibliometric analysis of breast augmentation has not been published in recent years. The current study aimed to use a bibliometric analysis to conduct a qualitative and quantitative evaluation of breast augmentation research and provide the research trends and hotspots in this field.

METHODS

Publications on breast augmentation research were extracted from the Web of Science core collection database. VOSviewer 1.6.18 was used to assess co-authorship, co-occurrence, citation of countries, institutions, authors, and journals, as well as hotspot keywords.

RESULTS

On February 8, 2022, 4637 records of breast augmentation research published from 1985 to 2021 were collected. The bulk of the retrieved studies were original research articles (n = 2235, 48.20%). A total of 1053 (22.71%) papers were open access. The annual publication output increased annually. The USA was the driving force in this field and had a strong academic reputation. The top-contributing institution was the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (2.37%, with 110 publications). Plastic and reconstructive surgery (998 publications, 21.52%) published the most research in this field and was also the most frequently co-cited journal (22,351 citations, total link strength (TLS): 409,301). Clemens MW (68 publications, 1.47%) was the most prolific author, and Spear SL (1456 citations, TLS: 27,231) was the most frequently co-cited author. The research hotspots included the following four aspects: safety and effectiveness of breast implants, implant-based breast reconstruction, breast cancer incidence after breast implantation, and breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). The research trends were BIA-ALCL, implant-based breast reconstruction, BREAST-Q, acellular dermal matrix, capsular contracture, and autologous fat grafting.

CONCLUSION

The present study provides a panoramic view of breast augmentation research in plastic and reconstructive surgery. This novel comprehensive bibliometric analysis can help researchers and nonresearchers alike to rapidly identify the potential partners, research hotspots, and research trends within their areas of interest.

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 .

Comparison Of Endoscopic Transaxillary And Peri-areolar Approaches In Breast Augmentation With Smooth Implants

INTRODUCTION

The most common surgical approaches for breast augmentation in Asia have traditionally been peri-areolar and transaxillary. In recent years, transaxillary approach has become increasingly popular with the use of endoscopic methods, which result in safer and better outcomes. In the literature, there are no comparison studies of endoscopic transaxillary and peri-areolar approaches.

METHODS

This prospective study compared the outcomes of 275 women undergoing primary breast augmentation (endoscopic transaxillary n=205, peri-areolar n=70). All procedures were performed by a single surgeon using smooth round silicone implants and dual-plane pockets from April 2013 to March 2016. Every patient was monitored for a minimum of 4 years for minor and major complications.

RESULTS

Types and percentage of patients experiencing minor complications among transaxillary and peri-areolar patients were localized fluid collection in the wound (1% transaxillary, 7.1% peri-areolar), hypertrophic scarring or keloids (1% transaxillary, 8.6% peri-areolar), and areolar and nipple deformity (0% transaxillary, 8.6% peri-areolar). Major complications were postoperative bleeding (0% transaxillary, 2.9% peri-areolar) and capsular contracture, Baker Group III or IV (1% transaxillary, 5.7% peri-areolar).

CONCLUSIONS

Endoscopic transaxillary breast augmentation had better outcomes, with lower rates of complications than the peri-areolar approach. Reviewing the literature, our study is the first direct comparison of peri-areolar and endoscopic transaxillary incisions using smooth implants. With the risk of anaplastic large cell lymphoma associated with certain macrotexture implants, endoscopic transaxillary approach using smooth implants is the safer technique and very good alternative choice for Asian women who do not want any scarring on their breasts.

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.

Preoperative multimodal protocol reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Mastectomy with immediate reconstruction is a high-risk cohort for postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Known risk factors for PONV include female gender, prior PONV history, nonsmoker, age < 50, and postoperative opioid exposure. The objective of this observational, cohort analysis was to determine whether a standardized preoperative protocol with nonopioid and anti-nausea multimodal medications would reduce the odds of PONV.

METHODS

After IRB approval, retrospective data were collected for patients undergoing mastectomy with or without a nodal resection, and immediate subpectoral tissue expander or implant reconstruction. Patients were grouped based on treatment: those receiving the protocol - oral acetaminophen, pregabalin, celecoxib, and transdermal scopolamine (APCS); those receiving none (NONE), and those receiving partial protocol (OTHER). Logistic regression models were used to compare PONV among treatment groups, adjusting for patient and procedural variables.

MAIN FINDINGS

Among 305 cases, the mean age was 47 years (21-74), with 64% undergoing a bilateral procedure and 85% having had a concomitant nodal procedure. A total of 44.6% received APCS, 30.8% received OTHER, and 24.6% received NONE. The APCS group had the lowest rate of PONV (40%), followed by OTHER (47%), and NONE (59%). Adjusting for known preoperative variables, the odds of PONV were significantly lower in the APCS group versus the NONE group (OR=0.42, 95% CI: 0.20, 0.88 p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

Premedication with a relatively inexpensive combination of oral non-opioids and an anti-nausea medication was associated with a significant reduction in PONV in a high-risk cohort. Use of a standardized protocol can lead to improved care while optimizing the patient experience.

The Effect of Arm Position on Breast Volume Measurement Using Three-dimensional Imaging

BACKGROUND

Three-dimensional (3D) imaging offers an objective and quantitative way to evaluate the breast volume. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether arm position can be a factor influencing the measurement of breast volume and which arm position is more stable when using 3D breast imaging in evaluating the fat volume retention rate in autologous fat grafting for breast augmentation.

METHODS

Patients undergoing breast augmentation with autologous fat grafting in our department were selected for the first part of this study. Preoperative 3D breast imaging was performed at three different arm positions: at the sides, akimbo and with hands on the head. Scans on each arm position were repeated on the first day after surgery, taking six scans in total. Breast volume change (BVC) was compared before and after surgery. The patients planning to receive bilateral mammaplasty in our department were selected for the second part of this study. Two repeated 3D scans were performed at the sides, akimbo and hands on the head, and then, the breast volume change error (BVCE) was compared.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients (n = 50 breasts) were included in the first part of study. For the patients who received 100-200 ml fat injection, compared with hands on the head, a statistically significant difference in the average BVC was found at the sides and akimbo (p = 0.02). For the patients receiving more than 200 ml fat injection, there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (p > 0.05). Twenty-six patients (n = 52 breasts) were enrolled in the second part. For the average BVCE, there was no significant difference between the groups (p = 0.11).

CONCLUSIONS

The arm position during 3D breast imaging, to some extent, affects the evaluation of BVC after breast augmentation using autologous fat grafting, particularly for patients receiving less fat grafting. The arm position should be kept consistent when using 3D breast imaging in evaluating the fat volume retention rate.

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 Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

Safety of a Protective Funnel in Primary Breast Augmentation: A Retrospective Analysis of 380 Multicenter Cases in the United States

BACKGROUND

Protective funnel devices are commonly used to deliver implants in primary breast augmentation (BA) yet there is a paucity of evidence-based data describing their safety in the literature.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of protective funnels in primary BA within the first 30 days postoperatively.

METHODS

This multicenter, Level 3 study retrospectively reviewed the surgical records of 380 consecutive patients (760 breasts) who underwent primary BA by 9 board-certified plastic surgeons using the iNPLANT Funnel (Proximate Concepts LLC, Allendale, NJ) for implant delivery between November 2019 and December 2020. Data were collected pertaining to demographics, implant information, surgery details, and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

The mean patient age was 33 years and 76% of patients had a BMI <25 kg/m2. Of this cohort, 11.4% were smokers, 0.8% had diabetes, and 83% were ASA Class 1. All patients received smooth implants with a median volume of 375 cc. A total of 8 (2.1%) complications were reported, including 3 hematomas (0.79%), 1 seroma (0.26%), and 1 superficial infection (0.26%). No patient required explantation. We identified ASA class, BMI, surgery duration, and implant size as potential risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The data suggest that the use of protective funnels, such as the iNPLANT Funnel, in primary BA is a safe option when these are utilized according to the manufacturer's Instructions for Use. The use of this device led to a low infection rate (0.26%) and a complication rate of (2.1%) consistent with the average reported in the literature (2%-2.5%).1 Implications for clinical practice are encouraging and future research will include a prospective analysis with a larger case series and potentially a control group.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Screening of women with aesthetic prostheses in dedicated sessions of a population-based breast cancer screening programme

BACKGROUND

Women with aesthetic prostheses must be included in the target population of mammography screening programmes. Breast implants are radiopaque and partially obscure the breast tissue. This can be avoided with the use of the Eklund technique, which causes an increased radiation exposure. In this study, augmented women undergoing a dedicated protocol within a population-based screening programme were compared according to selected indicators with the standard screening population. Essential dosimetric parameters and their time trend were also assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was conducted in a screening centre in Milan in the years 2009-2016. The screening protocol for women with breast implants included a double-read mammography with the Eklund views, ultrasound and clinical breast examination.

RESULTS

A total of 28,794 women were enrolled, including 588 (2%) women with breast implants and 28,206 (98%) undergoing the standard screening protocol. The invasive assessment rate was 9.0‰ for women with breast implants vs. 15‰ in the standard cohort. The surgical referral rate was 2.2% vs. 0.9%. The detection rate was similar in the two groups (4.0 and 4.5‰, respectively). There were significant differences in the average glandular dose according to the mammography equipment. The use of the Eklund views increased over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Screening of augmented women according to a specific protocol in the contexts of population-based programmes is feasible. Observed differences in screening indicators relative to the standard screening population require further research. The increasing use of Eklund views probably results from quality assurance measures associated with screening programmes.

Breast Implant Utilization Trends in USA versus Europe and the Impact of BIA-ALCL Publications

Background:

The goals of this study were to analyze and compare breast implant preferences between US and European surgeons in terms of size, shape, and surface texturing. Furthermore, we set out to investigate the impact of BIA-ALCL scientific publications on surgeon practice patterns.

Methods:

Breast implant sales data from the USA and Europe dating from June 2013 to September 2018 were provided by one of the world’s leading breast implant manufactures (Mentor Worldwide LLC). Change-point analysis was used to identify when significant changes in sales trends occurred. These changes were compared with dates of government announcements and publications of landmark scientific articles regarding BIA-ALCL.

Results:

Our data demonstrate that US surgeons tend to prefer larger, smooth round implants compared with European surgeons, who prefer smaller, textured round implants. Despite these differences, medium-sized implants were still the most common size used between both regions. Sales trends illustrate an increase in smooth implants and a decrease in textured implants for both regions. Significant changes in trends align with publication dates of announcements and landmark scientific articles.

Conclusions:

We demonstrate definitive differences in implant preferences between the USA and Europe. We encourage physicians to continue their pursuit of publishing because it seems these publications affect medical device selection.

An Expert Consensus Study for Informed Consent in Primary Breast Augmentation Surgery

BACKGROUND

What constitutes adequate information for decision-making and informed consent is a practical question appropriately answered with deference to expertise.

OBJECTIVES

The aims of this study were: (1) to establish consensus on a procedure-specific core information set of essential informed consent information by relevant medical experts for primary breast augmentation surgery; and (2) to define from the clinical perspective the data source and imminence elements of evidence-based risk communication.

METHODS

The study followed a modified Delphi expert consensus model. Active members of The Aesthetic Society were identified as the relevant clinician experts and were recruited by email. Survey round 1 was informed by a scoping review of the relevant scientific and gray literature. Round 2 was informed by the initial survey round. Consensus was defined a priori as a 75% majority rating.

RESULTS

Expert consensus of essential information was achieved for 16 risk items, 1 risk factor, and 8 expectations-including benefits and burdens-along with clarification of clinically appropriate options to present to all patients considering primary implant-based breast augmentation surgery. A basic, procedure-specific, structure for evidence-based risk data is also described.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper reports results for the first phase of a larger pilot study aiming to develop a patient decision aid to replace traditional informed consent documents for the specified procedure. Implications for practice are encouraging in terms of reducing unwanted variation in disclosure practices and information overload.

In search for the 'perfect' breast implant: are textured implants still indicated in today's breast augmentation practice?

The popularity of breast augmentation procedure has driven research and debate as to whether any given implant characteristic offers a functional advantage. One such debate exists about the role of surface texturing. In the aftermath of the recent withdrawal of aggressively textured surfaces we would like to summarize the first author's experience of nearly 1500 primary aesthetic breast augmentations with different surfaces and offer our thoughts on this topic. All consecutive primary breast augmentations operated by the first author from January 2010 to June 2019 were included. All patients had silicone implants inserted via inframammary incision. Of all the operated cases, 1029 consecutive female patients had at least 6 months' follow-up (mean 15.1 months). Their mean age was 31.2 years, mean BMI 20.8 kg/m² and mean implant volume was 311 cc. 997(96.9%) patients had dual plane and 32(3.1%) had sub-glandular implant placement. In total 113 patients (11.0%) developed a complication. This represented 15.1% of those with round and 10.0% of anatomical shape (or 10.6% of textured and 14.5% of smooth surface implants). As clinicians, we like patients to receive all the advantages of an implant but not be exposed to any risks. However, in reality, such a 'perfect implant' still does not exist. New literature continues to shed light on this trade-off between an implant's perceived utility and its complications profile. We hope that the search for an alternative technology, with more beneficial surface characteristics and less drawbacks, continues.

Simultaneous Augmentation Mammoplasty and Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy for Enhanced Cosmesis and Efficacy

BACKGROUND

In this era of expanding life expectancy and popularity of aesthetic breast surgeries, more women are likely to live more years with their augmented breasts. Thus, consistent attention to general breast health is crucial, and preoperative ultrasound is helpful to locate suspicious lesions. In this study, we present a combinative procedure of augmentation mammoplasty and vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB).

METHODS

From January of 2018 to December of 2019, a total of 102 patients received simultaneous augmentation mammoplasty and VABB in our institute. Only patients of primary augmentation mammoplasty who received VABB on unilateral breasts were included. We sought to investigate the results of each breast and safety of adding VABB before performing augmentation within the same incision.

RESULTS

Among 204 breasts and implants, 28.43% were done via endoscopic transaxillary approach and 71.57% via inframammary approach. The mean implant volume was 329.34 ± 44.79 ml, and the mean follow-up period was 14.23 ± 4.64 months. All of the complication rates exhibited no statistically significant differences between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Simultaneous augmentation mammoplasty and VABB prevented unnecessary scars and pain, and the complication rates did not statistically differ from those of augmentation only group. This co-operation is a safe and simple method potentially beneficial to many women interested in breast surgery.

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 .

Breast Implants for Mammaplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Multiple Complications

BACKGROUND

The association of breast implants and complications after mammaplasty has been extensively researched. The aim of this study is to summarize all available results in meta-analysis investigating the association between implants and the incidence of various complications.

METHODS

An umbrella review for breast implants and associated complications was performed by searching related reviews from electronic databases including Pubmed, Ovid and CINAHL. We collected and reviewed evidence across meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies of implants and any health outcome. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool (A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews).

RESULTS

The research included 92 meta-analyses of 609 studies concerning various areas. Capsular contracture was the most investigated outcome. Radiotherapy, human acellular dermal matrix application, direct-to-implant reconstruction, smooth implant, silicone-filled implant and periareolar incision were significantly associated with higher rates of some of the complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review provides surgeons with summarized evidence of the association between the complications and implant-related factors in mammaplasty surgery to help surgeons make informed choices in the future.

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 .

Is Banning Texturized Implants to Prevent Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma a Rational Decision? A Meta-Analysis and Cost-Effectiveness Study

BACKGROUND

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an emergent disease that threatens patients with texturized breast implants. Major concerns about the safety of these implants are leading to global changes to restrict the utilization of this product. The principal alternative is to perform breast augmentation utilizing smooth implants, given the lack of association with BIA-ALCL. The implications and costs of this intervention are unknown.

OBJECTIVES

The authors of this study determined the cost-effectiveness of smooth implants compared with texturized implants for breast augmentation surgery.

METHODS

A tree decision model was utilized to analyze the cost-effectiveness. Model input parameters were derived from published sources. The capsular contracture (CC) rate was calculated from a meta-analysis. Effectiveness measures were life years, avoided BIA-ALCL, avoided deaths, and avoided reoperations. A sensitivity analysis was performed to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

For avoided BIA-ALCL, the incremental cost was $18,562,003 for smooth implants over texturized implants. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was negative for life years, and avoided death and avoided reoperations were negative. The sensitivity analysis revealed that to avoid 1 case of BIA-ALCL, the utilization of smooth implants would be cost-effective for a risk of developing BIA-ALCL equal to or greater than 1:196, and there is a probability of CC with smooth implants equal to or less than 0.096.

CONCLUSIONS

The utilization of smooth implants to prevent BIA-ALCL is not cost-effective. Banning texturized implants to prevent BIA-ALCL may involve additional consequences, which should be considered in light of higher CC rates and more reoperations associated with smooth implants than with texturized implants.

Device-Specific Findings of Imprinted-Texture Breast Implants: Characteristics, Risks, and Benefits

BACKGROUND

The relative risks and benefits of various textured breast implants are the focus of considerable discussion. Studies have suggested different risk-benefit profiles for different implant surface topographies.

OBJECTIVES

The study aim was to provide device-specific, quantitative information on Mentor's imprinted Siltex Textured breast implants with respect to textured surface characteristics and ISO 14607 classification, risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), and risk-reduction benefits relative to smooth implants.

METHODS

Surface metrology was performed. Data for smooth and Siltex implants from the prospective MemoryGel Core Study were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier analysis for the most frequently occurring postoperative complications in augmentation and reconstruction leading to subsequent reoperation.

RESULTS

The overall average surface roughness for Siltex MemoryGel and MemoryShape implants was 29.5 and 36.1 µm, respectively. A statistically significantly lower rate of reoperation in patients with Siltex compared with smooth devices over 10 years was observed for both capsular contracture in subglandular primary augmentation patients (4.21% vs 19.84%) and for asymmetry in primary reconstruction patients (3.88% vs 11.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Surface analysis demonstrated that Siltex implants fall within the ISO 14607 category of "microtexture" breast implants. These devices exhibited a rare risk of BIA-ALCL (0.0012%) based on the most extensive data available. Relative to smooth implants, these Siltex devices provided risk-reduction benefits for the most common reason of reoperation in patients who underwent primary augmentation (capsular contracture) or primary reconstruction (asymmetry) in the Core Study. These findings provide valuable risk-benefit information for surgeons and their patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2

The New Method of Pocket Forming for Breast Implant Placement in Augmentation Mammaplasty: Dual Plane Subfascial

Introduction:

Breast augmentation is one of the most frequently performed aesthetic surgical procedures in the world. The most important preoperative decisions which influence the final appearance of the augmented breast are the breast implant pocket choice and selection of the most appropriate implant. Described pocket locations are subglandular, subfascial, partially retropectoral, totally submuscular and dual plane.

Aim:

We have introduced a new method of pocket forming for implant placement, which is combination of Tebbett’s dual-plane 2 or 3 and Graf’s subfascial. We named it as dual plane subfascial.

Methods:

Between January 2016 and April 2018, total of 27 patients were operated using dual plane subfascial breast augmentation. The pinch test in the medial pole less than 2,0 cm and in upper pole less than 2,5 cm are indications for this technique. In our modification, in primary cases a dissected flap in front of muscle is fasciocutaneous (not cutaneous as in Tebbett’s technique). It will be finally located caudally of pectoral muscle and in front of the lower pole of implant. Fasciocutaneous flap in primary cases and two independent levels of soft tissue coverage (fascial and cutaneous) in secondary cases (subglandular to dual plane subfascial conversion) in front of the lower pole of implants provide better coverage than cutaneous flap alone.

Results:

Hematoma and infection did not occur in any patient in our study. A capsular contracture grade I/II without the need for reoperation occurred in two patients. In one patient with secondary augmentation minimal bottoming out was noticed (before reoperation patient had significant bottoming out deformity). Minimal palpability of implants is recorded in three patients.

Conclusion:

Dual plane subfascial is a good option in primary breast augmentation with a well set indication especially in the breasts with the upper pinch test less than 25 mm and medial pinch test less than 20 mm. The idea can be followed even in secondary breast augmentation (subglandular to dual plane subfascial conversion). There is additional soft tissue in front of the implant which led to a less implant palpability, especially in thin patient with smaller amount of subcutaneous fat.

Smooth Prosthesis: Our Experience and Current State of Art in the Use of Smooth Sub-muscular Silicone Gel Breast Implants

BACKGROUND

The objective of this clinical review is to provide an overview of the use of silicone gel-filled breast implants placed in the sub-muscular position, with a focus on complication rates reported for both smooth and textured implants. Furthermore, our experience in this field is also reviewed.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Scopus, the Cochrane Central and Google Scholar databases were reviewed to identify the literature related to smooth breast implants. Each article was reviewed by two independent reviewers to ensure all relevant publications were identified. The literature search identified 98 applicable articles. Of these, just a few articles were found to have a therapeutic level of evidence. The reference lists in each relevant paper were screened manually to include relevant papers not found through the initial search.

RESULTS

Eight articles report the risk of capsular contracture when the breast implants were placed in the sub-muscular position. Six of these articles report a similar rate of capsular contracture in smooth and textured implants. Local complications such as wrinkling, late seroma and double capsules were found to be associated with the use of textured breast implants (4 articles). All articles concerning BIA-ALCL reported a total absence occurring in smooth breast implants. All cases have been associated with textured mammary prostheses.

CONCLUSION

With our expertise in the field and the results of this up-to-date literature review, it can be concluded that there are no significant advantages of using one type of implant surface over the other when placed in the sub-pectoral position.

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.

International Expert Panel Consensus on Fat Grafting of the Breast

Background

Autologous fat grafting has broad applications in reconstructive and aesthetic breast surgery as a natural filler and for its regenerative purposes. Despite the widespread use of fat grafting, there remains no shared consensus on what constitutes the optimal fat grafting technique and its oncological safety. For this reason, the authors of this study have organized a Survey and an International Consensus Conference that was held at the Aesthetic Breast Meeting in Milan (December 15, 2018).

Methods

All studies on fat grafting, both for breast aesthetic and reconstructive purposes, were electronically screened. The literature review led to 17 "key questions" that were used for the Survey. The authors prepared a set of 10 "key statements" that have been discussed in a dedicated face-to-face session during the meeting.

Results

The 10 key statements addressed all the most debated topics on fat grafting of the breast. Levels of evidence for the key statements ranged from III to IV with 2 statements (20%) supported by a level of evidence III and 6 statements (60%) by level of evidence IV. Overall consensus was reached for 2 statements (20%) with >75% agreement reached for 7 statements.

Conclusions

The survey demonstrated a diversity of opinion and attitude among the panelists with regard to technique. Clear recommendations for evidence-based clinical practice for fat grafting use both in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery could not be defined due to the scarcity of level 1 or 2 studies.

Methods used for evaluation of volume retention rate in autologous fat grafting for breast augmentation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Autologous fat grafting has gained popularity in breast augmentation. Various methods can be used to estimate the volume retention rate. This systematic review aimed to establish whether the type of method used for measuring breast volume is a factor that influences the reported volume retention rate.

METHODS

Studies were identified using the electronic databases PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science from inception of the database up to February 2019. Articles describing autologous fat grafting for breast augmentation were selected based on pre-determined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The characteristics of the included studies were summarized, and the reported volume retention rate from the studies was compared. A quality assessment of all included articles was performed using the methodological index for non-randomized studies criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 618 articles were identified, of which 12 studies, with a total of 1337 cases, were eligible. The retention rate of injected adipose tissue varied when the method of fat grafting and volume analysis used were both the same, as well as when the method of fat grafting was the same but the method of volumetric evaluation used was different.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, the tools available for estimating the volume retention rate come with limitations. In order to objectively evaluate the percentage of graft retention, a standard protocol that applies to the different methods should be established in the future.

Iatrogenic Symmastia: Causes and Suggested Repair Technique

BACKGROUND

Various theories exist to explain the etiology of iatrogenic symmastia. Subglandular over-dissection of the medial breast pocket over the sternum, disruption of midline sternal fascia, oversized implant base diameter, and over-dissection of the medial pectoralis muscle attachments to the sternum are popular explanations.

OBJECTIVES

The authors hypothesized that the most common risk factor for iatrogenic symmastia is subpectoral breast augmentation.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was conducted including all symmastia patients who underwent surgery from January 2008 to April 2018 by a single surgeon (C.L.M.). ASAPS members were also surveyed regarding the etiology and incidence of symmastia in their practice.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients with symmastia were included in the retrospective chart review. All had previous subpectoral breast augmentation. In the ASAPS survey, 91 plastic surgeons reported seeing an average of 2.2 consults for acquired symmastia over the preceding year; 1.9 of the 2.2 (84.9%) acquired symmastia consults previously underwent subpectoral breast augmentation. Most surgeons attributed these patients' symmastia to over-dissection of the medial pectoralis muscle attachments to the sternum.

CONCLUSIONS

Symmastia is most often caused by pectoralis major sternal dehiscence during subpectoral breast augmentation. In the senior author's experience, all patients with iatrogenic symmastia previously had a submuscular breast augmentation. The ASAPS survey supports multiple causes for symmastia with retromuscular breast augmentation occurring in the majority of patients. Repair of symmastia should include securing Scarpa's fascia to the sternum, reattaching the pectoralis major to the sternum, avoiding another subpectoral implant, and using postoperative modalities to protect the repair.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Endoscopic Transaxillary Versus Inframammary Approaches for Breast Augmentation Using Shaped Implants: A Matched Case-Control Study

PURPOSE

The incision for breast augmentation can be chosen from the transaxillary, inframammary fold, periareolar, or transumbilical approaches. While the inframammary fold approach is commonly used worldwide, the transaxillary approach is more popular in Asia due to the more conservative location of the scar. In this study, we performed augmentation mammoplasty using anatomically shaped implants via the endoscopic transaxillary and inframammary fold incisions and compared the outcomes.

METHODS

Three hundred sixty-four patients who underwent breast augmentation with shaped implants were enrolled. All were primary and bilateral cases. In total, 728 shaped implants were used. Patients' demographics, incision type, and complications were documented. Complications such as capsular contracture, hematoma, infection, implant malposition, wound problem, and chronic seroma were observed during the average 27 months of follow-up period and analyzed.

RESULTS

One hundred ninety-five patients underwent augmentation mammoplasty via the inframammary approach, whereas 169 patients underwent the endoscopic transaxillary approach. Implant type and size were matched between the two groups. Complication rates were 1.8% and 2.7% in the inframammary and transaxillary approach, respectively. There was no significant difference between the two approaches in terms of surgical complications (p = 0.593).

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that the endoscopic transaxillary approach is not inferior to the inframammary approach when shaped implants are used for augmentation mammoplasty. Therefore, the transaxillary approach may be an alternative method when using shaped implants for augmentation mammoplasty, especially for women who wish to avoid a visible scar on the inframammary fold.

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 .

Breast Implant Selection: Consensus Recommendations Using a Modified Delphi Method

Background:

Geographical differences in breast implant selection approaches exist, and clinical data to guide the process are limited. Developing knowledge of implant-related risk factors further complicates the process. This analysis aimed to establish expert consensus on considerations for breast implant selection in Australia and New Zealand based on practice patterns in those countries.

Methods:

A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus from experts in breast augmentation surgery in Australia and New Zealand. Panelists anonymously completed an initial questionnaire on current considerations in implant selection, discussed a summary of their responses in a live meeting, and completed a final consensus survey based on their live recommendations.

Results:

Seven panelists completed the final consensus survey. Consensus recommendations included ensuring consideration of proper surgical technique (pocket formation, positioning of implant) and patient tissue and anatomical characteristics, weighing relative expected results of various surface textures, sizes, and degrees of cohesivity, and careful contemplation of the migration risk.

Conclusions:

This modified Delphi exercise provided consensus recommendations on the key factors involved in implant selection from the perspective of plastic surgeons with practices in Australia and New Zealand. A primary recommendation was that the choice of implant for each patient should be individualized to patient tissue and anatomical characteristics.

Lipoaugmentation following Implant Removal Preferred by Plastic Surgeons and the General Public

BACKGROUND

Breast implant removal followed by fat transfer to the breast (lipoaugmentation) is a newer procedure and as such there is a need for empirical aesthetic comparisons between breast augmentation with implants versus fat transfer. Fat transfer to the breast is becoming an important option for women seeking reoperation of breast augmentation.

METHODS

A survey was created using standardized before and after photographs of 12 patients who underwent implant removal and lipoaugmentation. Four photographs of breasts that had no surgery were used as controls, with identical before/after photographs. The survey was administered to 96 respondents from the general population and 10 plastic surgeons. Respondents were asked to rate the breasts using a 5-point Likert scale without procedural knowledge. The responses were evaluated using parametric statistical t tests to compare responses to implants versus fat transfer in terms of their respective attractiveness, naturalness, size, symmetry, and femininity.

RESULTS

Fat transfer was significantly preferred to implants on all 5 measures; attractiveness, naturalness, size, symmetry, and femininity. Fat transfer was significantly preferred to implants by a margin of +0.36 average on 1-5 scale, which is approximately 1/3 of a Likert interval on all measures. Plastic surgeons took significantly longer than the general population to complete the survey and preferred fat transfer over implants to a higher degree.

CONCLUSIONS

Lipoaugmentation can provide a favorable aesthetic outcome in women seeking implant removal. The general public can be conveniently surveyed via crowd sourcing, and their aesthetic judgments largely mirror those of trained and experienced plastic surgeons. Patients weighing breast implant removal or breast implant revision could consider this study in their decision making.

Complications in breast augmentation with textured versus smooth breast implants: a systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Breast augmentation is one of the most popular aesthetic plastic surgeries worldwide. There are various types of breast implants, and these can be categorised into different broad groups based on their content, shape or surface, to name a few. When looking at the surface of the shell, they can be categorised into two main kinds: textured and smooth implants. To our knowledge, a literature review and meta-analysis of the complications of these two types of implants when used for aesthetic breast augmentation has yet to be written.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane electronic databases will be searched from their inception to 1 October 2017. Only cohort studies, case series, case-control studies and randomised controlled trials will be included. Identification of the articles for inclusion will be carried out by two independent researchers, and data will be extracted from these studies for analysis. This protocol defines the inclusion and exclusion criteria, as well as the primary and secondary outcomes. Statistical data analysis will be conducted in Review Manager V.5.3 from Cochrane Collaboration. The methodological quality of the included studies will also be assessed.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This review will analyse secondary data collected from studies which are not linked to any specific individual. Once completed, the conclusions of the review could prove to be a valuable resource for plastic surgeons to conduct aesthetic implant procedures. The review will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at various national and international conferences.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017078727.