Not All Breast Implants Are Equal: A 13-Year Review of Implant Longevity and Reasons for Explantation

A Comparative Analysis of Local and Systemic Immunological Biomarkers in Females With Breast Implants and Capsular Contracture

Background

The etiology of capsular contracture (CC), the most common complication following breast augmentation, remains unclear. Chronic, fibrotic inflammation resulting in excessive fibrosis has been proposed as a potential mechanism.

Objectives

In this study, we aimed to investigate the relation between biomarkers that are associated with inflammation and fibrosis and the severity of CC.

Methods

Fifty healthy females were categorized into 3 groups: females with no-to-mild CC (Baker 1-2; n = 15), females with severe CC (Baker 3-4; n = 20), and a control group awaiting breast augmentation (n = 15). We assessed 5 biomarkers (galectin-1 [Gal-1], interferon-β [INF-β], interferon-γ [INF-γ], interleukin-6 [IL-6], and tumor necrosis factor-α [TNF-α]) in breast implant capsules and serum samples.

Results

No significant differences in intracapsular cytokine levels were observed between the Baker 1-2 and the Baker 3-4 groups, as the levels were generally low and, in some cases, almost undetectable. In the blood samples, no significant differences in Gal-1, INF-γ, IL-6, or TNF-α levels were found within the 3 groups. We identified significantly increased levels of INF-β (P = .009) in the blood samples of females with severe CC, driven mainly by 3 extremely high values.

Conclusions

The cytokines assessed in this study did not reflect the degree of CC among females with silicone breast implants. However, 3 females with severe CC, who all had prolonged silicone exposure, showed extremely elevated levels of INF-β in their serum samples. This possible association between prolonged silicone exposure and systemic inflammation in some females should be further investigated.

Level of Evidence 3

Updated trends of breast implant surgeries: An Israeli analysis

INTRODUCTION

Breast augmentation remains one of the most prevalent procedures in plastic surgery. While most patients experience high satisfaction with the outcomes, a subset may encounter various complications or dissatisfaction with achieved results necessitating subsequent surgical intervention including implant removal or exchange.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We collected information from three pivotal private medical centers in Israel where a considerable number of breast surgeries are performed. We examined the number of breast augmentations, implant exchange and implant removal surgeries with or without breast lift that were performed on a biannual basis for each center for the period 2018-2022. Trends in surgery types were analyzed and compared to registries in other countries.

RESULTS

Between the years 2018 and 2022, 20,075 surgeries were done in three main private medical centers in Israel. Data show a gradual increase in implant removal surgeries from 2018 (n = 80, 2.9%) to 2019 (n = 269, 9.9%), followed by a significant increase in 2020 (n = 1436, 27.3%), and a gradual decline between 2021 (n = 1019, 22.8%) and 2022 (n = 916, 18.5%). The overall number of breast implant insertion procedures (breast augmentation procedures and exchange procedures) was 2659 in 2018 (97%), 2424 in 2019 (90.0%), 3816 in 2020 (72.6%), 3437 in 2021 (77.1%), and 4019 in 2022 (81.4%).

SUMMARY

We present updated trends in breast implant surgeries in Israel. 2020 was a key year in which the rate of explantations was the highest, and the percentage rate of implantations was the lowest and a year in which the trend changed. These patterns partly align with trends seen in other countries worldwide.

Treatment of Complications After Minimally Invasive Breast Augmentation with Aquafilling Gel

INTRODUCTION

Recent studies have revealed that Aquafilling gel used for breast augmentation causes complications. In this study, we investigated which surgical approach should be used to treat these complications.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This observational cohort study analysed the data of 31 women suffering from complications after breast enlargement with Aquafilling injection who were treated at our department in 2016-2021. Patients underwent either conservative or radical surgery. GraphPad Prism 9 (GraphPad Software, La Jolla, CA, USA) was used for data processing.

RESULTS

Approximately 88.89% of patients after conservative surgery required reoperation, while only 22.73% of patients treated radically needed revision surgery. Every patient who underwent an attempt to remove the gel via needle prior to admission required surgery. Seventy-five per cent of them had positive culture swabs, whereas only 26.09% of patients who did not undergo needle aspiration had positive cultures. A positive correlation between the volume of injected filler and the number of symptoms was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to irrigation and drainage, Aquafilling removal should include infiltrated tissue excision during primary surgery. Moreover, needle aspiration of the filler is ineffective, and it may lead to a gel infection. Furthermore, the more filler is injected, the higher the number of complications observed. 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 .

The Double Capsule Phenomenon in a Case Series and its Relationship with the Macro-Textured Breast Implant

BACKGROUND

Silicone breast augmentation remains one of the most common aesthetic surgery procedures, and 2022 marks the 60th anniversary of the first case. Recent studies suggest a link between double capsule (DC) formation and macro-textured devices.

METHODS

Between 2010 and 2015, 268 aesthetic patients underwent bilateral mammary prosthesis exchange for indications including PIP exchange, adverse capsular contracture and ultrasonographic evidence of rupture. All surgery, in the form of implant exchange and capsulectomy, was undertaken by the senior author using standard techniques. A retrospective review was undertaken, and data analysed with descriptive statistics and Fisher's exact and Mann-Whitney U tests.

RESULTS

Of 268 patients identified, 40 (14.9%) showed some degree of capsular duplication and bilateral involvement was marginally more common (52.5%). Two macroscopic patterns of duplication were observed: complete and subtotal. Complete DCs correlated with a clinical triad of extreme firmness, mobility and minimal-to-no pain. Whilst a wide range of manufacturers was represented, macro-textured devices were associated with the highest DC prevalence (58.3% vs. 5.6%) (Fisher's exact test p < 0.00001). Patients with DC had been implanted for less than half the time, median 52 versus. 120 months (p = 0.0003) of those without.

DISCUSSION

An elevated prevalence of duplicate capsules in macro-textured prostheses is reconfirmed in addition to a novel symptom constellation that may assist with clinical diagnosis. Our study reinforces the aetiopathogenic influence of the elastomer in DC formation and reports DC for the first time in non-macrotextured implants. Single-surgeon cohort of 268 consecutive patients with 532 implants Statistically significant association of macro-textured devices with DC Statistically significant reduced duration of implantation of macro-textured devices First report of DC in non-macro-textured devices 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 .

What Can We Learn from Breast Implant Explantation: a 28-Year, Multicenter Retrospective Study of 1004 Explantation Cases

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast augmentation remains popular, but the controversy over the safety and longevity of implants has continued. An event-based analysis of reasons for implant explantation may provide us with some insight into the controversy.

METHODS

Data from May 1994 to October 2022 of explantation cases from aesthetic breast augmentation in three medical centers were retrospectively reviewed. Patient characteristics, time to explantation, reasons for visit, the major reason for explantation and intraoperative findings were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 522 patients with 1004 breasts were included in our study. Objective explantation reasons accounted for 34.0% in primary augmentation breasts and 47.6% in revision augmentation breasts, which were significantly different (p = 0.006). The most common complaint was dissatisfaction with breast appearance, followed by concerns about implant safety, poor hand feeling and pain. 43.5% of the implants worn for more than 10 years were removed for objective reasons, which was found significantly different with the proportion of objective reasons in implants removed within 1 year and 1-5 years postoperatively (p < 0.008).

CONCLUSION

The proportion of different reasons for implant explantation varies across the times of surgeries and the years that the implant had been worn. As the years of implant wearing increase, the proportion of subjective reasons decreases in implant removal cases and objective reasons increase among them.

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 Explantation With Simultaneous Mastopexy and Volume Restoration: An Analysis of Clinical Outcomes and Prospective Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

An increasing number of patients are undergoing explantation to alleviate symptoms attributed to the presence of a prothesis or dissatisfaction with the appearance of their breasts.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aim to evaluate the clinical effectiveness and quality of life (QoL) of simultaneous explantation, capsulectomy, and mastopexy for patients requesting implant removal.

METHODS

Two hundred sixty-two simultaneous explantation, capsulectomy, and mastopexy (ECM) procedures were performed in 131 patients from 2009 to 2019. Prospective QoL assessment was administered for all patients. Inclusion criteria included a minimum postoperative follow-up of 6 months and completion of a practice-generated patient reported outcomes (PRO) questionnaire. Wilcoxon signed-rank test was performed to compare changes in QoL scores.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up and BMI were 23 months (6 months to 8 years) and 24.8 kg/m2 (18-34 kg/m2), respectively. Mean age was 48.3 years (26-75 years). Autologous fat grafting was performed simultaneously in patients 47.3% (n = 62). The complication rate was 3.8% (n = 10 breasts) in 9 patients (6.9%). The overall reoperation rate was 7.3% of procedures (n = 19 breasts) and 9.2% of patients (n = 12), including secondary autologous fat grafting (11.3%, n = 7). PRO results demonstrated a significant improvement in all QoL domains, including physical well-being (P < .005), psychological well-being (P < .005), sexual well-being (P < .005), breast shape (P < .005), and breast appearance (P < .005). With respect to breast implant illness symptoms, 59 patients (88.1%) noted reduced pain, myalgias/arthralgias, and fatigue after ECM.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents an effective paradigm to manage implant removal through simultaneous explantation, capsulectomy, and mastopexy with acceptable clinical outcomes and a significant improvement in QoL and breast aesthetics.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Factors impacting informed consent in cosmetic breast augmentation

BACKGROUND

For women who undergo cosmetic breast augmentation, their post-operative risk assessment may not match their pre-operative understanding of the involved risks and likelihood of revision surgeries. This may be due to the potential issues surrounding whether patients are being fully informed about all possible risks and related financial implications during the consent phases of patient/doctor consultation.

METHODS

To explore comprehension, risk preference, and perceptions of breast augmentation procedure, we conducted a recorded online experiment with 178 women (18-40 years) who received varying amounts of risk-related information from two experienced breast surgeons in a hypothetical first consultation scenario.

RESULTS

We find patient's age, self-rated health, income, education level, and openness to experience to be significant factors impacting initial breast augmentation risk preferences (before receiving any risk information). Further, more emotionally stable patients perceived greater breast augmentation risks, were less likely to recommend breast augmentation, and were more likely to acknowledge the likelihood for future revision surgery. After providing women with risk-related information we find increases in risk assessment in all treatment conditions, and that increased amounts of risk information do decrease women's willingness to recommend breast augmentation. But that increased risk information does not appear to increase women's assessment of the likelihood of future revision surgery. Finally, we find some participant individual differences (such as education level, having children, conscientiousness and emotional stability) appear to impact risk assessment post receiving risk information.

CONCLUSION

Continuous improvement of the informed consent consultation process is vital to optimising patient outcomes efficiently and cost-effectively. Greater acknowledgement and emphasis on disclosure of related risks and financial burden when complications arise is also important. As such, future behavioural research is warranted into the factors impacting women's understanding both prior to and across the BA informed consent process.

Six-Year Evaluation of Motiva Round and Ergonomix SmoothSilk Surface Silicone Breast Implants: A Two-Center, Two-Surgeon Outcome Analysis of 1053 Primary and Secondary Breast Augmentations and Augmentation Mastopexy

BACKGROUND

The emerging concerns around breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma and other chronic inflammatory-related conditions have instigated a wider use of smooth devices.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to present 6-year data following the introduction of Motiva implants (Establishment Labs Holdings Inc.; Alajuela, Costa Rica) into their previously texture-dominated practice. Additionally, the authors aimed to provide technical recommendations on how to efficiently incorporate these devices into surgical practice and minimize the learning curve.

METHODS

Data of 1053 primary and secondary breast augmentations conducted between April 2015 and December 2020 in 2 centers (Victoriakliniken in Sweden and the European Institute of Plastic Surgery in Cyprus) were retrospectively evaluated to obtain data on chosen implant characteristics and complications that led to reoperation, prior to and following modifications to surgical practice in 2018.

RESULTS

The data from 6 consecutive years demonstrate a low device-related complication rate with Motiva implants. In 2018, following adaptions in surgical practice, the complication rate significantly declined.

CONCLUSIONS

Motiva implants demonstrate a low complication rate and safety profile for women undergoing primary and secondary breast augmentation procedures. However, to reap the benefits of the antifibrotic profile, technical adaptions and optimal patient planning based on the patient and device characteristics are instrumental. Employing the key principles laid out in this study provides a means for delivering both clinically safe options to patients with aesthetically pleasing long-term results.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Biomedical Silicones: Leveraging Additive Strategies to Propel Modern Utility

Silicones have a long history of use in biomedical devices, with unique properties stemming from the siloxane (Si-O-Si) backbone that feature a high degree of flexibility and chemical stability. However, surface, rheological, mechanical, and electrical properties of silicones can limit their utility. Successful modification of silicones to address these limitations could lead to superior and new biomedical devices. Toward improving such properties, recent additive strategies have been leveraged to modify biomedical silicones and are highlighted herein.

Pharmacological Approaches for the Prevention of Breast Implant Capsular Contracture

Capsular contracture is a common complication associated with breast implants following reconstructive or aesthetic surgery in which a tight or constricting scar tissue capsule forms around the implant, often distorting the breast shape and resulting in chronic pain. Capsulectomy (involving full removal of the capsule surrounding the implant) and capsulotomy (where the capsule is released and/or partly removed to create more space for the implant) are the most common surgical procedures used to treat capsular contracture. Various structural modifications of the implant device (including use of textured implants, submuscular placement of the implant, and the use of polyurethane-coated implants) and surgical strategies (including pre-operative skin washing and irrigation of the implant pocket with antibiotics) have been and/or are currently used to help reduce the incidence of capsular contracture. In this article, we review the pharmacological approaches-both commonly practiced in the clinic and experimental-reported in the scientific and clinical literature aimed at either preventing or treating capsular contracture, including (i) pre- and post-operative intravenous administration of drug substances, (ii) systemic (usually oral) administration of drugs before and after surgery, (iii) modification of the implant surface with grafted drug substances, (iv) irrigation of the implant or peri-implant tissue with drugs prior to implantation, and (v) incorporation of drugs into the implant shell or filler prior to surgery followed by drug release in situ after implantation.

MRI Screening after Silicone Implant Breast Surgery: Patient Survey of Adherence to FDA Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The FDA recommends women with silicone breast implants undergo MRI surveillance to detect asymptomatic rupture. Screening is costly and often not covered by insurance. We assessed awareness of and adherence to FDA recommendations among patients with silicone breast implants.

METHODS

We searched electronic medical records for patients ≥18 years old with silicone breast implants placed between 2011 and 2016. Consenting patients were surveyed by telephone using a standardized script to assess awareness of FDA recommendations, whether they had undergone MRI screening, and barriers to testing. Patients who declined to participate or could not be contacted were excluded. Demographics and operative data were collected. Odds ratios were calculated with one-sample 95% confidence intervals and Fisher's exact tests of independence were conducted under assumptions of normality. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to test for confounding.

RESULTS

Of 370 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 109 consented to participate. Adherence to FDA recommendations was 5.9% (95%CI [0.15%-28.7%]). There was no difference in adherence between patients undergoing cosmetic versus reconstructive surgery (p = 1.00, OR 0.80, 95% CI 1.17-2.93), having health insurance (p = 0.58) or residing in a county with median annual household income greater than that of the state of residence (p = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

A small proportion of respondents had undergone MRI in accordance with FDA recommendations. Low adherence highlights a potential limitation of current Federal surveillance recommendations. Additional research is needed to better characterize adherence to MRI surveillance recommendations, identify barriers to implementation, and determine whether this recommendation remains valid.

Advanced Strategies to Thwart Foreign Body Response to Implantable Devices

Mitigating the foreign body response (FBR) to implantable medical devices (IMDs) is critical for successful long‐term clinical deployment. The FBR is an inevitable immunological reaction to IMDs, resulting in inflammation and subsequent fibrotic encapsulation. Excessive fibrosis may impair IMDs function, eventually necessitating retrieval or replacement for continued therapy. Therefore, understanding the implant design parameters and their degree of influence on FBR is pivotal to effective and long lasting IMDs. This review gives an overview of FBR as well as anti‐FBR strategies. Furthermore, we highlight recent advances in biomimetic approaches to resist FBR, focusing on their characteristics and potential biomedical applications.

Breast Implant-associated Double Capsules: What Do We Know So Far? A Systematic Review of the Literature

INTRODUCTION

A double capsule is a recently described rare occurrence following breast implant placement in which an inner capsule envelope totally or partially adheres to the implant surface while a distinct outer capsule adheres to surrounding tissues, with an intercapsular space developing between the two. The objective of this study is to review all available literature related to formation of double capsules and propose a treatment algorithm.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A systematic review of the literature was conducted using Embase, Medline, and Cochrane databases. Articles reporting management of breast implant-associated double capsules were included in this review.

RESULTS

A total of 9 studies (68 implants) were included in the review. 94.1% of double capsules occurred with textured Biocell shaped and round implants independently from implant pocket (p value=0.64). In all cases, double capsules were diagnosed fortuitously intra-operatively for another surgical indication. Capsular contracture was present in 50% of double capsules patients and was the most common indication for secondary breast surgery, 81.5% of which being clinically evident (p value<0.001). Treatment consisted in 84.4% in an inner capsulectomy with smooth implants exchange, and management of the outer capsule as per the capsular contracture algorithm.

CONCLUSION

Double capsule formation is caused by delamination of a tight adhering capsule to a textured implant surface into two layers and continuous micro-shearing forces, and the probable contribution of bacterial biofilm. The only treatment reported so far includes inner with or without outer capsulectomy with smooth implant exchange.

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 .

Self-Reported Health Complaints in Women Undergoing Explantation of Breast Implants

Background

Concerns about the safety of silicone breast implants (SBIs) have existed for years, but a causal relation between systemic complaints and SBIs has not been proven. Nevertheless, some women are worried and even request explantation.

Objectives

This study aimed to review the explantation procedures performed, focusing on patient-reported symptoms preoperatively, the effect of explantation, and the effect of breast reconstruction on these symptoms.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed for patients who had undergone explantation between 2010 and 2020 at Maastricht University Medical Center. Patients who had undergone tissue expander removal, tissue expander–implant exchange, or direct implant exchange were excluded.

Results

More than half of the patients undergoing explantation reported complaints, mostly pain. Some 15% reported systemic complaints they believed were implant related. Breast implant illness (BII) was found to be the fifth most common indication for explantation (11.2%). A history of either allergies or implant rupture resulted in higher odds ratios of having BII (odd ratios, 2.1 and 2.1, respectively). Subjective improvement of BII after explantation was reported by about 60% of patients.

Conclusions

A relatively low prevalence of suggested BII exists among women undergoing explantation; 1 in 9 procedures were performed for this reason. Allergy and implant rupture may increase the likelihood of having BII. About 60% of BII patients experienced an improvement in their complaints after implant removal. Autologous breast reconstruction appears a good alternative. Prospective studies into health complaints and quality of life should be performed to confirm the effectiveness of explantation as a therapy for BII.

Level of Evidence: 4

Defining Double Capsules: A Clinical and Histological Study

BACKGROUND

Macrotextured breast implants are associated with double capsules. There is little agreement as to what defines double capsules, how they present, and whether different degrees of double capsule exist.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to define double capsules and report an association between double-capsule type and degree of tissue adherence.

METHODS

Consecutive aesthetic patients undergoing explantation of Biocell (Allergan, Inc., Irvine, CA) implants between May 2018 and November 2018 were included if they were found to have double capsules intraoperatively. Patient demographics, implant characteristics, explantation reason, implant adherence, and intraoperative findings were recorded. Both adherent and double capsules were histologically examined. Data were analyzed by descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Eleven patients had 22 Biocell implants explanted during the study period. The average explantation time was 8.0 years. Sixteen implants were found to have some degree of nonadherence, and all areas of nonadherence were associated with double-capsule formation. Double capsules were either partial or complete. The architecture of the inner layer of double capsules varied between an organized capsular layer and a thin area of nascent capsule. Histologically, all capsular specimens demonstrated an overall hypocellular fibrous capsule with scattered chronic inflammatory infiltrates. Synovial metaplasia was present in all capsule types and spaces/cracks in the capsule were disproportionately represented in partially adherent capsules.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to identify a clinical and pathological correlation between double capsules and failed tissue adherence. Double capsules represent a spectrum of inner capsule formation ranging between nascent capsular tissue to a mature inner capsular layer.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Implant Replacement or Removal: What Happens after Capsular Contracture? A German Study Examining Breast Implant Revision Surgery and Patient Choices in 946 Cases

Introduction

Capsular contracture most often leads to implant revision surgery for aesthetic or reconstructive purposes. However, little is known about which operation is chosen when revision surgery has to be performed. We performed analysis of revision indications and performed revision surgery considering implant removal or replacement and additional surgical procedures. To our knowledge, this study presents the largest German single-center analysis regarding implant revision surgery after the onset of complications.

Methods

Retrospective 10-year data analysis of a single-center population undergoing breast implant revision surgery.

Results

Capsular contracture was the most frequent finding before reoperation, both removal and replacement (p < 0.05). It was linked to longer duration of in situ implant placement (p < 0.05) and more frequently in reconstructive patients (p < 0.05). Implant replacement was performed more often before definite implant removal for reconstructive patients (p < 0.05). Mean duration of in situ implant placement before definite removal was lower for reconstructive patients (p = 0.005). Overall reconstructive patients were older than aesthetic patients (p < 0.05). After implant removal, 61.7% of aesthetic patients chose to undergo mastopexy, 54.7% of reconstructive patients opted for autologous breast reconstruction, and 25.4% did not choose an additional surgical procedure after implant removal.

Conclusion

Significant differences are observed for reconstructive and aesthetic patients regarding indication leading to revision surgery, time of revision surgery, and the type of performed revision surgery itself. After implant removal, more than 60% of aesthetic patients undergo mastopexy, more than half of reconstructive patients choose autologous breast reconstruction, and over a quarter of patients choose no additional surgical procedures.

Risk Factors for Explantation of Breast Implants: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Explantation of breast implant surgery (EBIS) is an emerging surgical field. Precise information about patients undergoing EBIS is important for preoperative planning of breast, augmentation, complications management, and to address any medicolegal issues.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to further extend current knowledge of EBIS risk factors.

METHODS

An analytic cross-sectional study was conducted involving patients who had previously undergone cosmetic breast augmentation and were seeking EBIS.

RESULTS

The study recruited 138 patients. The average time from implant placement and decision to explantation was 59.1 months. On average, each 1-year increase in age resulted in a 4% increase in the relative risk (RR) of explantation (confidence interval (CI), 1.07-1.21). Patients who were obese or overweight present a 1.5 times higher risk of EBIS (CI 95%, 1.03-2.29). On average, this RR was 40% lower (CI 95%, 0.33-0.91) in patients who never smoked compared with those with a history of tobacco use. Women with mastalgia had a 72% higher RR for EBIS (CI 95%, 1.11-2.65). The RR of EBIS was 5.6 times higher (CI 95%, 2.42-11.47) in patients presenting major Shoenfeld's criteria for autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA). The RR of EBIS was 4.3 times higher (CI 95%, 1.96-8.63) in patients presenting minor Shoenfeld's criteria for ASIA.

CONCLUSIONS

EBIS poses a higher risk to patients who are overweight/obese, have a history of tobacco use, suffer from mastalgia, or present Shoenfeld's criteria for ASIA. It is important to assess properly these individuals before performing implant surgery for breast augmentation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Breast-related and body-related quality of life following autologous breast reconstruction is superior to implant-based breast reconstruction - A long-term follow-up study

INTRODUCTION

The better survival rates after breast cancer allow for setting of long-term goals, such as Quality of Life (QoL) and aesthetic outcomes following breast reconstruction. Studies find a higher breast-related QoL and greater satisfaction with breasts following autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) compared to implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). However, aesthetic results from donor sites can influence body image. This concern is little addressed in the literature. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare the long-term breast-related and body-related QoL of women who underwent ABR to women who underwent IBR.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A multicenter, cross-sectional survey was conducted between November and December 2020 among women who underwent postmastectomy breast reconstruction between January 2015 and December 2018. A general questionnaire, the BREAST-Q, and the BODY-Q were used to collect data. Multivariable linear regression was performed to adjust differences in Q-scores for potential confounders.

RESULTS

In total, 336 patients were included (112 IBR, 224 ABR). Autologous reconstruction resulted in significantly higher mean scores in all subdomains of the BREAST-Q. On the BODY-Q, IBR scored significantly higher on scars, while ABR scored moderately to significantly higher on all other scales. Despite a lower mean score on Hips & outer thighs in women with Lateral Thigh Perforator (LTP) flap reconstruction, no negative influence on body image was found in these women.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term breast-related and body-related outcomes of ABR are superior to IBR. Donor site aesthetic does not adversely affect body image in women who underwent free flap breast reconstruction.

Biocell-Initial patents versus user instructions guide: A discrepancy at the core of a crisis

PURPOSE

Our aim is to do a comparative qualitative analysis of patents and "User Manuals" of the Biocell textured implants in order to determine if red flags were omitted when marketing and using Biocell textured implants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a systematic qualitative analysis using the NVivo software version 11 of the patents describing the Biocell textured implants prior to their approval by the FDA and of user guides published by the 3 companies owning the patents (McGhan, Inamed, Allergan). To guide our thematic analysis, we used a form of systems theory known as the complexity theory.

RESULTS

Four patents related to Biocell and 2 user manuals (McGhan- Inamed and Allergan) were analyzed. Four themes emerged from the patents: invention description, mechanism of action (Tissue ingrowth), the timing of the mechanism of action and hypothetical actions on capsular contractures prevention. Of all patent's content, 34% described the invention, 29% the mechanism of action (tissue ingrowth), 1% the timing of this mechanism of action and 34% a hypothetical action against capsular contracture. Solid evidence was found on the concept of anchoring and very little on capsular contracture. On the user guide side, the main themes were indications and contraindications, surgical techniques and long-term effects. The "directed" content analysis approach of the user guides regarding the patent's themes reflected that 94% of the user guides content related to the patent thematics was about the hypothetical role on capsular contracture while only 4% was about invention description and 1.5% about tissue ingrowth.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis highlights the discrepancies between patents of Biocell textured implants and user guides for these implants. The indications of use of a treatment or device can evolve quicker than the study of its potential complications and side effects. The BIA-ALCL crisis should serve as a cautionary tale to the plastic surgery community which embraces new technologies eagerly, and sometimes precariously, in a mission to advance patient care.

Evaluating the Necessity of Capsulectomy in Cases of Textured Breast Implant Replacement

BACKGROUND

Capsulectomy has traditionally been recommended as a treatment for capsular contracture after breast augmentation. With the advent of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), and the Food and Drug Administration's decision to ban Biocell textured devices, this operation has taken on new importance. This review was undertaken to better inform clinical recommendations for women with textured devices.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed using PubMed to identify all the available literature on the subject of capsulectomy and open capsulotomy (the alternative treatment).

RESULTS

Fifty-seven articles on this topic were identified. Capsulectomy was widely recommended for treatment of capsular contracture, although many authors recommended leaving thin capsular tissue behind in the absence of symptoms. En bloc resection was recommended only for women with a diagnosis of BIA-ALCL. No information supported a prophylactic role for capsulectomy in asymptomatic women with textured breast implants who are concerned regarding their future risk of BIA-ALCL. Routine pathologic examination in asymptomatic patients was not supported.

DISCUSSION

Capsulectomy adds substantially to the surgical risk, discomfort, recovery time, and expense. Implant removal or replacement without a simultaneous capsulectomy is atraumatic and poses negligible risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Capsulectomy introduces additional morbidity and is not mandatory for asymptomatic patients. Implant removal or exchange for smooth implants without a capsulectomy may be an acceptable choice for many women who do not demonstrate capsular pathology. However, any symptoms or surgical findings suggesting pathology warrant a capsulectomy. En bloc resections are reserved for patients diagnosed with BIA-ALCL.

Applying Principles of Breast Revision to Managing Aesthetic Patients with Textured Implants

SUMMARY

Textured breast implants have garnered increased attention recently because of their risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), an uncommon and treatable type of T-cell lymphoma. Treatment involves bilateral en bloc capsulectomy, which is curative in the majority of cases. At present, there is no defined management approach for aesthetic patients asymptomatic for BIA-ALCL requesting the removal of their textured implants, particularly as it relates to the management of the capsule. It is unclear if en bloc capsulectomy is necessary in these patients as it is in patients with BIA-ALCL. In the absence of clear guidance on the management of the capsule in asymptomatic patients, the basic principles of breast revision surgery can be applied to these patients.

Plastic Surgeons Defend Textured Breast Implants at 2019 U.S. Food and Drug Administration Hearing: Why It Is Time to Reconsider

Textured breast implants were the subject of a U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) hearing on March 25 and 26, 2019. Regulating agencies in other countries, including all of Europe and Canada, have already banned macrotextured implants. Patients affected by Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) recounted their life-changing experiences, and requested a ban on textured devices. Plastic surgeons, many with industry ties, spoke in favor of keeping the devices available. The historical advantages of textured implants were presented, including a reduced capsular contracture rate. A 14-point plan to improve sterility at the time of implantation was promoted as an effective alternative to reduce both capsular contractures and BIA-ALCL risk. However, recent studies show that textured implants have not delivered on their early promise. Biocell implants perform worse, not better, than other implant types, and capsular contracture rates are not significantly reduced according to recent core studies. The only known risk factor for BIA-ALCL is textured implants. The lifetime risk for Biocell implants is at least 1:2, 200. There is no reliable evidence that surgical technique makes a difference in risk. This serious issue represents a case study of conflict of interest. In light of recent information, a re-analysis of the true risks and benefits of textured implants is justified. It is time for our professional societies to recognize that the device is the problem rather than surgical technique. On May 2, 2019, the FDA decided against a ban on textured breast implants.