Surgical Correction of Symmastia:

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.

Revisional Breast Surgery: Are Surgical Plans Changed if the Patient Has a Textured Device?

SUMMARY

The authors reviewed the available evidence on revision surgery following implant-based breast surgery with the aim of investigating whether any difference in the surgical approach should be proposed if the patient has a textured device. They included in their review 31 studies presenting different approaches for revision surgery following implant-based breast surgery (both aesthetic and reconstructive), with a level of evidence ranging from 4 to 5. None of the included studies proposed different surgical approaches for revision surgery in patients carrying textured devices. The authors conclude that no different surgical attitudes in revision surgery following implant-based breast surgery should be adopted if the patient has a textured device according to the available evidence, when a correct approach is performed to face the complication or adverse event, following a thorough preoperative study of the patient with the proper diagnostic tools.

Surgical treatment of symmastia: A systematic review of techniques, outcomes and complications

BACKGROUND

The term "symmastia" defines a confluence across the mid-sternal line of the breast mounds and subsequent loss of adhesion between sternum and pre-sternal skin. This condition can be congenital or, more frequently, iatrogenic. Despite the number of different treatments published in literature, no systematic review or surgical techniques classification has been attempted in literature. There is, therefore, a concrete need to elucidate surgical options and propose a treatment algorithm, improving surgical practice and patient's care.

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review aims to collect and evaluate the published evidence on surgical procedures to correct symmastia deformities (both congenital and acquired) in order to clearly overview possible treatments and outcomes related to this surgery, providing a surgical classification guide as well.

METHODS

In accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, PubMed database was queried for papers describing symmastia surgical treatment, along with operative indications, outcomes, and complications.

RESULTS

In this review, 23 articles and 118 patients were finally included. Four main categories of treatment were identified: dermo-sternal adhesions, capsulorrhaphy, neopocket creation, and muscle repair. Symmastia correction was achieved and satisfactory in 108 of patients, despite varying techniques. Globally, recurrence was the most frequent complication, reported in the 8.5% of cases.

CONCLUSION

Symmastia represent a difficult condition to treat and recurrence is a common problem. Because of the low number of patients involved in the studies, it is difficult to make conclusions as to the superiority of one technique over another. However, this review, collecting comprehensively for the first time the surgical knowledge over this topic, could guide the surgeon to choose the best surgical treatment based on nowadays evidence.

Contralateral Augmentation with a Transmidline Scarless Technique During Unilateral Breast Reconstruction Using Implants

BACKGROUND

Unilateral breast reconstruction can be a challenge when attempting to achieve an aesthetically pleasing and symmetrical breast mound on the contralateral side. This study investigates the outcomes of using a contralateral augmentation transmidline scarless (CATS) technique to simultaneously augment the contralateral breast using implants.

METHODS

Between January 2004 and July 2016, patients undergoing unilateral implant-based breast reconstruction and simultaneous contralateral implant augmentation using a transmidline access were studied. Characteristics and complications using this technique were assessed.

RESULTS

Sixty-five (91.5%) of 71 patients used the CATS technique for unilateral breast reconstruction using implants with contralateral breast implant augmentation. The remaining 6 cases used a preexisting chest scar. In the assessment of complication rates between the reconstructed and augmented sides, the reconstructed side had a statistically significant higher rate of implant exposure (P = 0.04) and total complications (P = 0.02). In comparing the revision rates between these 2 groups, the need for implant change (P = 0.04) and the total revision rates (P = 0.01) were higher in the reconstructive side. Use of saline implants had a higher rate of chest wall and breast skin necrosis (P = 0.03) in comparison with silicone implants. There was not a statistically significant difference in complications when comparing timing of reconstructions (immediate versus delayed).

CONCLUSIONS

The CATS technique can be performed safely, with a desirable aesthetic outcome, and also symmetry with minimal risk of symmastia during unilateral breast reconstruction using implant-based reconstruction.

Techniques to Repair Implant Malposition after Breast Augmentation: A Review

BACKGROUND

Implant malposition is a complication of breast augmentation that adversely affects aesthetic outcomes. It is one of the most common reasons for revisionary aesthetic breast surgery yet there is a lack of peer reviewed literature dedicated to the management of this complication.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this article was to summarize the malposition literature, review the types and causes of this complication, and evaluate the strengths and weakness of procedures aimed at addressing it.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using the PubMed database. Articles describing surgical techniques for correction of implant malposition, as well as outcome data for patients undergoing revision with described techniques, were included. Articles describing revisionary surgery following breast reconstruction were excluded. A series of cases are presented to illustrate techniques discussed.

RESULTS

Search criteria resulted in 763 articles. Title and abstract review followed by application of inclusion and exclusion criteria resulted in a total of 21 clinical studies from 1988 to 2014 that were included in this review. All studies included in this study were of level IV or V evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the overall low level of evidence in the literature regarding secondary breast augmentation, a thorough understanding of the corrective techniques presented will allow surgeons to make the most informed judgments. Weighing the strengths and weakness of these surgical techniques in the context of each patient will allow surgeons to develop the most appropriate treatment strategy. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE 4: Therapeutic.

Five-step Correction of Congenital Symmastia

Congenital symmastia is distressing and difficult to treat, and traditional surgical modalities have met with limited success. We present a novel approach for a patient that failed all traditional surgical options. The anatomic deformity is analyzed using a modified version of Blondeel’s 3-step analysis (conus, footprint, and skin envelope, to which we added a fourth element “intermammary web”). Combining operative principles from breast cancer reconstruction, we describe 5 operative steps that help correct the deformity, followed by a new postoperative splinting regimen that addresses the common pitfalls that could lead to recurrence.

Application of "CD-4" theory for determining the width of implant in breast augmentation

Background:

The determination of the width of the implant is the first key step to select shape and volume of the implant in breast augmentation. The aim of this study was to introduce a new method to determine the width of the implant (W) and explain the reasons to do so in details.

Methods:

From January 2006 to June 2014, the authors have found and applied “CD−4” theory to determine the width of breast implant (W) in dual plane I or II breast augmentation cases through transaxillary or periareolar incision for 560 patients. “CD” is defined as the curved distance on skin from the midline of the sternal bone to the anterior axillary line (AAL) on the lateral chest wall through the horizontal level on inferior mammary fold. W = CD − 4 (or 3.5) cm.

Results:

The 560 patients used both round and anatomic implants with W from 10.5 cm to 12.5 cm. Their CDs are from 14.5 cm to 17 cm. About 78% of the patients have got followed up from 1 month to 5 years postoperatively. Except for four patients who got unilateral capsular contractions, all the other patients are satisfied with their nature new breast shapes and volumes. Their new intermammary cleavages without bras are between 1 cm and 2.5 cm, and lateral borders of the breast are on the area of the AAL.

Conclusions:

W (width of the implant) = CD − 4 (cm) when doing dual plan I or II breast augmentation. For the very thin patient, 4 should be 3.5.