Safety and Efficacy of Smooth Surface Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction

Acute and chronic mammary periprosthetic histological changes of the muscle

Background

Augmentation mammoplasty with subpectoral prosthesis implantation is a frequent performed procedure in plastic surgery for reconstructive and aesthetic purposes. Although prosthesis implantation in a pocket under the major pectoralis muscle has been related to volumetric and functional alterations, there is not much information about the associated short- and long-term histological changes. Therefore, the aim of our study was to describe the acute and chronic histological muscle alterations associated with subpectoral prosthesis implantation.

Materials and Method

We collected samples from patients with breast tissue expander (<6 months after implantation) and prosthesis (>1 year after implantation) and from patients without implantation as a control group. The samples were processed for assessing their histological, histochemical and immunohistochemical properties.

Results

In the control group, no relevant histological findings were identified. Additionally, in the patients with expander, we observed mild augmentation of the internalised nuclei, normal morphology, significant muscle atrophy and fibrosis, whereas in the patients with prosthesis considerable augmentation of internalised nuclei, significant muscle atrophy, fibrosis and alteration of normal muscle morphology were observed.

Conclusion

Prosthesis implantation induces histological changes in the periprosthetic striated muscle. Chronic fibrosis and inflammation play key roles in this process, which should be characterised in more detail from the histological and molecular biological perspective.

Safety Profile Comparison of 2 Smooth Tissue Expander Types: Artoura and CPX4

INTRODUCTION

With the recent transition to smooth tissue expanders (TEs), functional differences between TE subtypes have not been fully elucidated. This study evaluated the differences in TE characteristics and complications between 2 commonly used Mentor smooth TE models, Artoura and CPX4.

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who received either smooth Mentor Artoura or CPX4 TE from 2012 to 2022 was conducted. Demographic data, perioperative information, pain scores, TE variables, cancer characteristics, and complications were collected. A multivariate analysis was used to evaluate the relationship between TE subtype and complications while controlling for demographic, TE characteristics, radiation, and chemotherapy exposure.

RESULTS

During the study period, 62 smooth Artoura TEs and 79 smooth CPX4 TEs were used. Patients who received CPX4 smooth implants tended to be older (51.09 vs 46.18 years old, P = 0.02) and have a higher body mass index (28.66 vs 23.50 kg/m 2 , P < 0.001). There were no differences among patient comorbidities. CPX4 required on average a greater total fill volume (422.23 vs 348.07 mL, P = 0.01) and had a greater drain duration (16.91 vs 14.33 days, P = 0.05). There were no differences in TE plane placement between Artoura and CPX4. Additionally, there were no differences in complication rates, including infection, hematomas, seromas, wound breakdown, TE replacement, and capsular contracture. When controlling for body mass index, diabetes, TE plane placement, acellular dermal matrix use, radiation exposure, and chemotherapy, there was no association between TE subtype and any individual complication.

DISCUSSION

Differences in total fill volume and drain duration were significantly different between Mentor Artoura and CPX4 implants, which may influence TE subtype selection. However, Artoura and CPX4 have excellent and equivalent safety profiles with similar complication rates, even when controlling for demographic and TE characteristics.

Impact of Tissue Expander Surface Texture on Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes: A Combined Analysis

BACKGROUND

With ongoing investigations of the impact of device texturing on breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), studies have begun comparing complication profiles of tissue expanders. However, there is a paucity of timing and severity data of complications. The aim of this study was to provide a comparative survival analysis of postoperative complications between smooth (STEs) and textured tissue expanders (TTEs) in breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A single-institution experience with tissue expander breast reconstruction was reviewed for complications up to 1 year after second-stage reconstruction from 2014 to 2020. Demographics, comorbidities, operation-related variables, and complications were evaluated. Kaplan-Meier curves, Cox proportional hazard models, and a consensus-based ordinal logistic regression model were used to compare complication profiles.

RESULTS

Of 919 total patients, 600 (65.3%) received TTEs and 319 (34.7%) received STEs. There was increased risk of infection ( P < 0.0001), seroma ( P = 0.046), expander malposition ( P < 0.0001), and wound dehiscence ( P = 0.019) in STEs compared with TTEs. However, there was also a decreased risk of capsular contracture ( P = 0.005) in STEs compared with TTEs. Failure of breast reconstruction ( P < 0.001) and wound dehiscence ( P = 0.018) occurred significantly earlier in STEs compared with TTEs. Predictors for significantly higher severity complications included the following: smooth tissue expander use ( P = 0.007), shorter time to complication ( P < 0.0001), higher body mass index ( P = 0.005), smoking history ( P = 0.025), and nipple-sparing mastectomy ( P = 0.012).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in the timing and severity of complications contribute to the safety profiles of tissue expanders. STEs are associated with increased odds of higher severity and earlier complications. Therefore, tissue expander selection may depend on underlying risk factors and severity predictors.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Complication Profiles of Smooth vs Textured Tissue Expanders in Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma first linked with breast implants in 2011. The correlation between BIA-ALCL and textured devices has led to increased use of smooth devices. However, much of the data surrounding smooth and textured devices investigates breast implants specifically and not tissue expanders.

OBJECTIVES

We performed a systematic review and a meta-analysis to compare surgical outcomes for smooth tissue expanders (STEs) and textured tissue expanders (TTEs).

METHODS

A search was performed on PubMed, including articles from 2016 to 2023 (n = 419). Studies comparing TTEs and STEs and reported complications were included. A random-effects model was utilized for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 5 articles met inclusion criteria, representing 1709 patients in the STE cohort and 1716 patients in the TTE cohort. The mean duration of tissue expansion with STEs was 221.25 days, while TTEs had a mean time of tissue expansion of 220.43 days.Our meta-analysis found no differences in all surgical outcomes except for explantation risk. STE use was associated with increased odds of explantation by over 50% compared to TTE use (odds ratio = 1.53; 95% CI = 1.15 to 2.02; P = .003).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, STEs and TTEs had similar complication profiles. However, STEs had 1.5 times higher odds of explantation. The incidence of BIA-ALCL is low, and only a single case of BIA-ALCL has been reported with TTEs. This indicates that TTEs are safe and may lower the risk of early complications requiring explantation. Further studies are warranted to further define the relationship between tissue expanders and BIA-ALCL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Impact of Initial Filling Medium on Outcomes of Subpectoral, Two-Stage, Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Air versus Saline

BACKGROUND

In two-stage expander-based breast reconstruction, the use of air as the initial filling medium has been suggested to confer clinical advantages over conventional saline, but this has not been demonstrated in a large series. This study aimed to evaluate the association between material type (air versus saline) for initial expander filling and postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective study included patients who underwent immediate, subpectoral, tissue expander-based breast reconstruction between January of 2018 and March of 2021. The participants were categorized into two groups according to the material used for initial filling: saline-inflated expanders, which were used during the first 22 months consecutively, and air-inflated expanders, which were used during the latter 17 months consecutively. Complications including mastectomy flap necrosis and postoperative expansion profiles were compared. Multivariable analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

A total of 443 breasts (400 patients), including 161 air-filled and 282 saline-filled breasts, were analyzed. The two groups had similar baseline characteristics. The air-filled group showed a significantly lower rate of mastectomy flap necrosis; this difference remained significant after adjustment for other variables in the multivariable analysis. The rates of other complications did not differ between the two groups. The air-filled group had fewer office visits and a shorter period to complete expansion.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of air for initial expander filling could provide safe and reliable outcomes with reduced patient discomfort during postoperative expansion; thus, air-filled expanders might be an effective alternative to saline-filled expanders.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Textured versus Smooth Tissue Expanders: A Comparison of Complications in 3526 Breast Reconstructions

BACKGROUND

Increased understanding of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma has led to a shift away from textured breast devices. A few small studies have compared the complication rates of textured and smooth tissue expanders (TEs). The aim of this study was to compare complication profiles in patients undergoing two-stage postmastectomy breast reconstruction with either textured or smooth TEs.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective review of female patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with textured or smooth TEs from 2018 to 2020 at their institution. Rates of seroma, infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, exposure, and TE loss were analyzed in the overall cohort and subgroups undergoing prepectoral and subpectoral TE placement. A propensity score-matched analysis was used to decrease the effects of confounders comparing textured and smooth TEs.

RESULTS

The authors analyzed 3526 TEs (1456 textured and 2070 smooth). More frequent use of acellular dermal matrix, SPY angiography, and prepectoral TE placement was noted in the smooth TE cohort ( P < 0.001). Univariate analysis suggested higher rates of infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, and exposure in smooth TEs (all P < 0.01). Rates of TE loss did not differ. After propensity matching, no differences were noted in infection or TE loss. Prepectoral smooth expanders had increased rates of malposition/rotation.

CONCLUSIONS

TE surface type did not affect rates of TE loss, although increased rates of expander malposition were noted in the smooth prepectoral cohort. Further research is needed to examine breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma risk with temporary textured TE exposure to improve decision-making.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCW

Therapeutic, III.

Smooth vs Textured Expanders: Patient Factors and Anatomic Plane Are Greater Factors in Determining First-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Textured implants and expanders are associated with an increased risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). As a result, plastic surgeons are utilizing smooth expanders, but many perceive these produce undesirable outcomes including infection, seroma, and lateral displacement.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare clinical outcomes of smooth and textured expanders.

METHODS

Breast reconstruction patients from January 2018 to May 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Included patients underwent placement of tissue expanders at the time of mastectomy. Primary outcomes included postoperative seroma, infection, malposition, days to final reconstruction, explantation, and the need for capsulorrhaphy.

RESULTS

In total, 233 patients were reviewed, of whom 167 met both inclusion and exclusion criteria. There was no statistically significant difference in poor outcomes comparing smooth and textured expanders. Days to final reconstruction was lower with smooth expanders per breast (P = .0424). The subpectoral group was associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing capsulorrhaphy (P = .004). Prepectoral placement was associated with more seromas (P = .0176) and infections (P = .0245). Demographic factors included older age as a protective factor for undergoing capsulorrhaphy (odds ratio [OR] = 0.962, P = .038), obesity increased the risk of infection (OR = 5.683, P = .0279) and malposition (OR = 6.208, P = .0222), and radiation was associated with malposition (OR = 3.408, P = .0246).

CONCLUSIONS

There was no significant difference in poor outcomes between smooth and textured expanders. Patient demographics and anatomical plane placement had greater effects on infection, seroma, and the need for capsulorrhaphy compared with tissue expander texturing.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

The current use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction: device design, features, and technical considerations

INTRODUCTION

The use of tissue expanders (TE) in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is a widely accepted practice, especially in patients desiring implant-based breast reconstruction. It has become the standard of care to perform a two-staged breast reconstruction using tissue expanders for the past 50 years due to its reliability, safety, cost-effectiveness, and versatility. Due to its popularity, there are numerous types and features of breast tissue expanders and various surgical approaches available for plastic surgeons.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, we will review the role of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction, the types and features of breast tissue expanders, and technical considerations.

EXPERT OPINION

The use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction offers significant advantages of preserving the breast skin envelope and reestablishing the breast mound. With evolving approaches to breast reconstruction, tissue expander design, and application underwent several refinements and modifications. Due to these advances, studies on its long-term efficacy and safety profile typically fall behind and more studies with higher levels of evidence are needed to better evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of tissue expanders. With increased understanding, reconstructive surgeons can minimize complications and maximize reconstructive, aesthetic outcomes with high patient satisfaction.

Smooth versus Textured Tissue Expanders: Comparison of Outcomes and Complications in 536 Implants

Background  Increasing concerns regarding the safety of textured surface implants have resulted in surgeons transitioning from textured tissue expanders (TEs) to smooth TEs. Given this change has only recently occurred, this study evaluated outcomes between smooth and textured TEs. Methods  Women who underwent two-stage breast reconstruction using TEs from 2013 to 2022 were included. TE-specific variables, perioperative information, pain scores, and complications were collected. Chi-squared, t -test, and linear regression analyses were performed. Results  A total of 320 patients received a total of 384 textured and 152 smooth TEs. Note that 216 patients received bilateral reconstruction. TEs were removed in 9 cases. No significant differences existed between groups regarding comorbidities. Smooth TEs had a higher proportion of prepectoral placement ( p  < 0.001). Smooth TEs had less fills (3 ± 1 vs. 4 ± 2, p  < 0.001), shorter expansion periods (60 ± 44 vs. 90 ± 77 days, p  < 0.001), smaller expander fill volumes (390 ± 168 vs. 478 ± 177 mL, p  < 0.001), and shorter time to exchange (80 ± 43 vs. 104 ± 39 days, p  < 0.001). Complication rates between textured and smooth TEs were comparable. Smooth TE had a greater proportion of TE replacements ( p  = 0.030). On regression analysis, pain scores were more closely associated with age ( p  = 0.018) and TE texture ( p  = 0.046). Additional procedures at time of TE exchange ( p  < 0.001) and textured TE ( p  = 0.017) led to longer operative times. Conclusion  As many surgeons have transitioned away from textured implants, our study shows that smooth TEs have similar outcomes to the textured alternatives.

The Impact of Nasal Staphylococcus aureus Carriage on Surgical-Site Infections after Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Risk Factors and Biofilm Formation Potential

BACKGROUND Despite the benefits of implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer, the procedure can be complicated by surgical site infections (SSI). This study aimed to evaluate the association between nasal carriage of Staphylococcus aureus strains and the incidence of SSI among patients who underwent reconstructive procedures. We also assessed the ability of colonizing S. aureus strains to form biofilm. MATERIAL AND METHODS Medical data from 124 patients with 132 post-mastectomy breast reconstructions performed at the Oncology Center in Bydgoszcz, Poland, between June 2020 and August 2021 were analyzed. A 90-day incidence of SSI was found in 7/132 reconstructions (5.3%). The study group included 132 reconstructions, and was divided into those with infection (n=7) and without infection (n=125). Between-group differences were assessed using the t test for continuous variables and chi-square test for categorical variables. Biofilm formation among 32 S. aureus strains was determined by using quantitative and qualitative assays. RESULTS There were no significant differences in relation to the patients' S. aureus colonization status. Infections occurred both in patients colonized and not colonized with S. aureus. S. aureus nasal carriage did not affect the rate of SSI at 90 days after surgery. About 97.0% of the strains had a strong capacity for biofilm formation. CONCLUSIONS There was no association between nasal carriage of strains of S. aureus and the incidence of SSI. However, further investigations on a larger group of patients and longer observation time are needed to investigate this potential risk factor in detail.

Seroma After Breast Reconstruction With Tissue Expanders: Outcomes and Management

BACKGROUND

Seroma is a relatively common complication after breast reconstruction with tissue expanders. The main risk in the presence of seroma is development of periprosthetic infection, which can lead to implant loss. Our goals were to identify risk factors for seroma, and to describe our protocol for managing fluid accumulation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An IRB approved breast reconstruction database was reviewed to identify patients who underwent tissue expander reconstruction. Patient characteristics, details of surgery, outcomes and treatment were recorded.

RESULTS

Two hundred nineteen tissue expander reconstructions were performed in 138 patients. Twenty-eight reconstructions developed seroma (12.8%), and 75 were identified to have prolonged drains (34.2%). Seroma was more common in patients with lymph node surgery ( P = 0.043), delayed reconstruction ( P = 0.049), and prepectoral reconstruction ( P = 0.002). Seroma and/or prolonged drains were more commonly noted in patients with higher body mass index ( P = 0.044) and larger breast size ( P = 0.001). Aspiration was the most common intervention (85.7%), which was performed in the clinic utilizing the expander port site. There was no difference in infection or explantation rate between seroma and no-seroma patients ( P = 0.546 and 0.167), whereas patients with any fluid concern (seroma and/or prolonged drains) were more prone to developing infection and undergoing explantation ( P = 0.041 and P < 0.005).

CONCLUSION

We recommend that prolonged drain placement longer than 3 weeks should be avoided, and patients should be screened for fluid accumulation after drain removal. Serial aspiration via expander port site and continuation of expansion provide a safe and effective method to manage seromas to avoid infection and expander loss.

A Propensity Score-Matched Comparison of Perioperative Outcomes in Prepectoral Smooth Versus Textured Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Textured tissue expanders (TEs) had previously gained popularity due to minimizing expander migration, rotation, and capsule migration. Recent studies, though, have revealed increased risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma associated with certain macrotextured implants, prompting surgeons at our institution to switch to smooth TEs; evaluation is thus required for specific viability and similarity of outcomes of smooth TEs. Our study aims to evaluate perioperative complications in prepectoral placement of smooth versus textured TEs.

METHODS

Our retrospective study evaluated perioperative outcomes of patients who underwent bilateral prepectoral TE placement, with either smooth or textured TE, at an academic institution between 2017 and 2021 performed by 2 reconstructive surgeons. The perioperative period was defined as the interval between expander placement until conversion to flap/implant or removal of TE due to complications. Our primary outcomes included hematoma, seroma, wounds, infection, unspecified redness, total number of complications, and returns to operating room secondary to complications. Secondary outcomes included time to drain removal, total number of expansions, hospital length of stay, length of time until the next breast reconstruction procedure, next breast reconstruction procedure, and number of expansions.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-two patients were evaluated in our study (141 textured, 81 smooth). After propensity matching (71 textured, 71 smooth), our univariate logistic regression showed no significant difference in perioperative complications between smooth and textured expanders (17.1% vs 21.1%; P = 0.396) or complications that required a return to the operating room (10.0% vs 9.2%; P = 0.809). No significant differences were noted for hematoma, seroma, infections, unspecified redness, or wounds between both groups. A significant difference was noted in days to drain out (18.57 ± 8.17 vs 20.13 ± 0.07, P = 0.001) and type of the next breast reconstruction procedure (P < 0.001). Our multivariate regression showed that breast surgeon, hypertension, smoking status, and mastectomy weight were significant for increased risk for complications.

CONCLUSION

Our study demonstrates similar rates and effectiveness of smooth versus textured TE when used for prepectoral placement, making smooth TEs a safe and valuable alternative for breast reconstruction because of their decreased risk of anaplastic large-cell lymphoma compared with textured TEs.

Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction

The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific implant topographies. Of note, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has only been observed in response to textured surface implants. We hypothesize that reduction of SMI surface roughness causes less host response and, hence, better cosmetic outcomes with fewer complications for the patient. A total of 7 patients received the routinely used CPX^®4 breast expander (~60 µM Ra) and the novel SmoothSilk^® (~4 µM Ra), fixed prepectoral with a titanized mesh pocket and randomized to the left or right breast after bilateral prophylactic NSME (nipple-sparing mastectomy). We aimed to compare the postoperative outcome regarding capsule thickness, seroma formation, rippling, implant dislocation as well as comfortability and practicability. Our analysis shows that surface roughness is an influential parameter in controlling fibrotic implant encapsulation. Compared intra-individually for the first time in patients, our data confirm an improved biocompatibility with minor capsule formation around SmoothSilk^® implants with an average shell roughness of 4 µM and in addition an amplification of host response by titanized implant pockets.

Breast Surgery with Smooth Anatomical Implants with Fixation System: A Review of the World's Largest Series of Cases

BACKGROUND

Anatomical implants continue to be a particularly useful tool in breast surgery, offering an excellent result for certain indications. However, to ensure fixation and prevent rotation, traditional alternatives have medium to high surface roughness and have been controversial in recent years.

METHODS

A retrospective assessment of 122 prosthetic augmentation and reconstruction patients over a period of 5 years was conducted. Patients were treated with tabbed anatomical implants with a smooth surface and followed up for a period of 12 months. Demographics, complications, and patient satisfaction were captured. A subgroup of 101 patients were assessed with chest radiographs at 1-year follow-up. Technical recommendations are discussed.

RESULTS

Primary breast augmentation, revision augmentation, augmentation-mastopexy, and breast reconstruction were the main indications for surgery. All implants were inserted through an inframammary incision and placed in the subpectoral space using dual-plane techniques, except in one mastectomy case. Rotation of the implants was radiographically observed in only two cases of revision augmentation. None of the 122 patients developed capsular contracture, seroma, rupture, infection, hematoma, or malposition following breast surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Smooth anatomical implants with a fixation system offer reliable and satisfactory results for patients with various diagnoses and indications. The tab system and the fixation technique are essential to provide long-term stability, which was verified by radiographs because of the radiopaque lines present in the device for that purpose.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Following Infected Device Explantation: Is a Second Attempt Worth It?

BACKGROUND

Infection is a dreaded complication of implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). There is a paucity of literature on the outcomes of a secondary reconstruction after infected IBR explantation.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent a second IBR following a failed infected device between January 2006 and December 2019. Surgical and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were collected and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 6093 IBRs were performed during the study period, 298 (5%) of which involved device removal due to infection. Eighty-three patients ultimately received 92 second-attempt IBR. Thirty-six percent of cases developed at least one postoperative complication, with infection (23 breasts; 25%) being the most common. Compared with first-attempt IBR, we found significantly higher infection rates among second-attempt cases (9% vs. 21%, respectively; p = 0.0008). Patient-reported satisfaction with the breast and sexual well-being were lower in second-attempt than in first-attempt IBR (p=0.018, p=0.002, respectively) reported in the literature. Mean follow-up was 41±35 months. If we exclude patients with prior radiation and those who received device exchange, success rate is 88%.

CONCLUSION

It is reasonable to offer women second-attempt IBR after explantation due to infection. However, this patient population has a higher infection and explantation rate and lower patient-reported satisfaction than patients undergoing first-attempt IBR. Because of these increased surgical risks and elevated complication rates, patients must be given reasonable expectations during preoperative discussions and when providing informed consent for second-attempt IBR.

Smooth versus textured tissue expanders in breast reconstruction - A retrospective review of post-operative surgical site infections

BACKGROUND

Textured tissue expanders (TTEs) were introduced to limit migration and reduce capsular contracture, which were inherent to smooth tissue expanders (STEs). Previous reports suggest that textured devices have increased rates of bacterial contamination and biofilm formation in comparison with smooth devices. Recently, the relative increased association of anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL) with textured versus smooth devices has led to increased adoption of smooth devices. The aim of our study is to evaluate the post-operative surgical site infection (SSI) rates of STEs versus TTEs.

METHODS

A retrospective case series was conducted at a single academic teaching hospital from April 2016 to December 2019. The primary outcome variable was the development of a post-operative SSI.

RESULTS

One hundred seventy-seven breasts underwent reconstruction with TTEs and 109 breasts underwent reconstruction with STE. In total, 54 SSIs were recorded (n = 34 TTE; n = 20 STE), with the majority of infections occurring within the first 30 post-operative days (TTE 65%, STE 70%). There was no statistically significant difference in overall post-operative infection rates between TTE and STE groups when broken down into the following time points: <30 day, 30-60 days, and >90 days (p = 0.924). There was no statistically significant difference between infection type (superficial vs. deep, p = 0.932), infection management (medical, surgical, or both, p = 0.409) or salvage results (p = 0.078) seen in STE versus TTE cohort. On multivariate analysis, seroma history was associated with SSI development (OR 3.18, p = 0.041).

CONCLUSION

There was no significant difference in the rate of post-operative SSI following breast reconstruction with STE relative to TTE.

Smooth Versus Textured Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: Complications and Efficacy

INTRODUCTION

Ongoing recognition of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and its link with textured devices has brought a paradigm shift in prosthetic-based breast reconstruction. Many institutions no longer offer textured expansion devices for staged reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data regarding the efficacy of smooth tissue expanders (TE). We hypothesized that the time to final reconstruction and complication profile between smooth and textured TEs would be similar in breast reconstruction patients.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of all patients who underwent TE breast reconstruction during a 6-year period at the Penn State Hershey Medical Center. Rates of complications treated nonoperatively and those requiring reoperation were assessed. Mechanical complications, including expander malposition and rupture, were evaluated. Time to final breast reconstruction was quantified. Mixed-effects logistic regression and linear regression models, as appropriate, were used to compare textured to smooth TEs. Patient characteristics and anatomic plane placement were adjusted for in all analyses of outcomes.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 389 patients, encompassing 140 smooth and 604 textured TEs. Textured devices had an increased incidence of complications treated nonsurgically (16.7% vs 10.7%; P = 0.14). However, smooth TEs had an increased incidence of reoperation (12.1% vs 7.6%; P = 0.06). Most noteworthy was that although smooth TEs had a 40-fold increase in malposition (13.6% vs 0.3%; P < 0.001), no reoperation for this complication was warranted. Further, the time to final reconstruction was comparable between the 2 devices (textured expanders: 221 days and smooth expanders: 234 days; P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

Staged, implant-based reconstruction is the most common surgical approach to recreate the breast mound following mastectomy. Textured TEs were the cornerstone to this approach. Unfortunately, the association between textured devices and BIA-ALCL now mandates an alternative. We postulated that smooth expanders would compare favorably for breast reconstruction. Although our study suggests that smooth TEs suffer more malposition, this has a negligible impact on the reconstructive timeline. Thus, smooth TEs may prove beneficial when considering the risk of BIA-ALCL associated with textured devices.

Advances in Tissue Expander Technology Enable Early Targeted Intervention in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction

Seroma and infection are among the most common complications after staged prepectoral implant-based reconstruction. Advances in tissue expander technology permit seroma aspiration via an integrated drain port, thus, holding promise for improving clinical outcomes.

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: Defining Future Research Priorities

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an emerging cancer of the immune system that is exclusively associated with textured-surface breast implants. This clinical review provides an update on the diagnosis and management of BIA-ALCL with an emphasis on major advances. The epidemiology and pathophysiology of the disease are also reviewed, focusing on current paradigm shifts and highlighting current controversies related to disease classification and risk mitigation. Finally, the authors conclude by discussing medicolegal and ethical issues surrounding BIA-ALCL while establishing a future basic science and clinical research agenda that is central to improving patient safety.

Judging an Expander by Its Cover: A Propensity-Matched Analysis of the Impact of Tissue Expander Surface Texture on First-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes

BACKGROUND

There is increased scrutiny of texturing on implants and a paucity of data looking at texturing on expanders. Because of the difficulty in controlling potential confounders with these comparative studies, the authors performed propensity matching between smooth and textured tissue expander cohorts to provide definitive insight into the impact of expander texture on breast reconstruction outcomes.

METHODS

A single-surgeon experience with immediate two-stage breast reconstruction was reviewed for 90-day postoperative complications after mastectomy and expander placement. Variables extracted included demographics, comorbidities, tissue expander texturing, mastectomy type, infection, seroma, skin flap necrosis, dehiscence, explantation, and overall complication rates. Subjects were 1:1 propensity matched using the nearest neighbor matching algorithm with caliper (maximum propensity score difference) of 0.2, and chi-square test was performed for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

After 1:1 propensity matching, 282 reconstructed breasts were analyzed (141 textured versus 141 smooth expanders). Textured expanders had higher minor infection rates than smooth expanders (5.0 percent versus 0 percent; p = 0.024). Smooth expanders had higher seroma rates than textured expanders (5.0 percent versus 0.7 percent; p = 0.031). Smooth expanders also had longer drain retention (20.4 days versus 16.8 days; p = 0.001). There was no difference in other complications, including major infection, explantation, or any complication, between textured and smooth expanders.

CONCLUSIONS

Textured expanders are associated with increased minor infection risk, whereas smooth expanders are associated with increased seroma formation. However, these differing complication profiles coalesce to equal explantation rates.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Safety of CPX4 Breast Tissue Expanders in Primary Reconstruction Patients

Background:

In the United States, 2-stage expander-to-implant–based breast reconstruction accounts for more than half of all breast reconstruction procedures. Tissue expansion technology has undergone significant advancements in the past few decades. Previous reports suggest that the most common perioperative complications associated with breast tissue expanders are infection and skin flap necrosis. However, little clinical data are available for CPX4 Breast Tissue Expanders. The aim of the study was to measure real-world outcomes related to safety and effectiveness of the tissue expansion process, in patients who underwent primary breast reconstruction following the use of CPX4 Breast Tissue Expanders.

Methods:

This was a single-arm retrospective cohort design looking at patients who underwent 2-stage, expander-to-implant–based primary breast reconstruction at a single site between April 2013 and December 2016 and who had a minimum of 2 years follow-up. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize baseline characteristics and safety outcomes.

Results:

A total of 123 patients were followed for an average of 3.73 ± 0.94 years. At least 1 complication during the time of tissue expansion, before the permanent implant, was reported in 39/123 (31.7%) patients [51/220 implants (23.2%)]. The most frequently reported complications were delayed wound healing (13.8%) and cellulitis/infection (9.7%).

Conclusion:

Analyses of real-world data from a single site provide further support for the safety and effectiveness of the CPX4 Breast Tissue Expander for women undergoing 2-stage expander-to-implant primary breast reconstruction.

Accidental Magnetic Resonance Imaging Activation of Carbon Dioxide Tissue Expanders

Implant-based reconstruction is the most common form of breast reconstruction following mastectomy. It is most often performed in 2 stages using saline-based tissue expanders, which are then exchanged for permanent implants. Serial expansions are performed by accessing a port in the office, an inconvenient and sometimes painful process. A carbon dioxide tissue expander is a device that provides a needle-free, patient-controlled expansion utilizing a remote-controlled CO₂ canister. While a patient-controlled expansion offers convenience, given that the CO₂ reservoir holds approximately 1500 mL of gas, the potential for malfunction resulting in an uncontrolled expansion in unique to this device. The authors present a case report of a patient with bilateral pre-pectoral tissue expanders who underwent magnetic resonance imaging, resulting in uncontrolled expansion.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 5

The Impact of Device Innovation on Clinical Outcomes in Expander-based Breast Reconstruction

Staged expander-based breast reconstruction represents the most common reconstructive modality in the United States. The introduction of a novel tissue expander with an integrated drain (Sientra AlloX2) holds promise to further improve clinical outcomes.