Innovations and advancements with prosthetic breast reconstruction

Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrices: Preliminary Results

Background: In an effort to shed light on the recent resurgence of prepectoral breast reconstruction and mounting concerns regarding acellular dermal matrices (ADMs), the senior author's experience with non-ADM-assisted immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction and its associated complications are presented. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of the senior author's prepectoral breast reconstruction practice without ADM from November 2019 to May 2021 was carried out. Data regarding patient demographics, oncologic management, and surgical outcomes were recorded. Results: A total of 66 patients (88 breasts) were included, with an average follow-up of 7.8 months (SD: 5.4). Of these, 24 (36.4%) underwent immediate expander and 42 (63.6%) direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstructions. Major complications included nipple-areolar complex necrosis (2%), hematoma (3%), device exposure (2%), and periprosthetic infections (5.7%). The overall rate of implant failure was 5.7%. Minor complications included simple cellulitis (10%) and minor wound dehiscence (4.5%). Increasing implant size (p < .005) in the DTI cohort and increasing body mass index (BMI) were associated with an increased likelihood of adverse events. Postmastectomy radiation had no effect on surgical complications. Conclusions: The authors hope that in the absence of large, prospective trials, our data demonstrate the safety of immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction without ADM. Our data demonstrate that our algorithm is particularly safe in patients with a low BMI and with an implant size <500cc in DTI reconstruction. Further large prospective studies are required to further support our data in demonstrating that foregoing ADM in immediate prepectoral reconstruction is a safe option.

Immediate Prepectoral Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix Is Equally Safe Following Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become increasingly popular over the last decade. There is a paucity of data surrounding the impact of mastectomy type on clinical outcomes when comparing prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) using tissue expansion. The purpose of this study was to compare 90-day reconstructive surgical outcomes in immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction between patients with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patient records was carried out on all patients undergoing NSM or SSM with immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction without ADM, in a single institution, from June 2020 to December 2021. All complications were recorded, categorized, and statistically analyzed for significance.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients (97 breasts) were studied. The mean age was 51 years old (range, 31-77). Twenty-two patients suffered complications recorded in 22 breasts (22.7%). There was no statistically significant difference in the total complications between the NSM (25.7%) and SSM (21.0%) groups or in the incidence of all major and minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction using tissue expanders without ADM has similar reconstructive outcomes in both NSM and SSM. There were no significant differences in complication rates between either groups. Breast reconstruction without ADM can confer institutional cost savings without compromising safety.

Recent Trends in Plastic Surgery: A Network Analysis of the Abstract Titles of the Largest German Plastic Surgery Congress 2023

BACKGROUND

Every year, German-speaking experts in plastic, reconstructive, and aesthetic surgery gather to discuss the latest developments at Germany's largest conference for plastic surgery, the joint annual meeting of the German Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (DGPRÄC) and the Association of German Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons (VDÄPC). Since the topics of the conference have a lasting impact on the practice and research of plastic surgery, an examination of the presented content provides insight into the driving developments in plastic surgery in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective network analysis of all abstract titles from the DGPRÄC and VDÄPC annual meeting in 2023. Data were extracted regarding titles, language, author, and place of origin, and the titles were categorized into the four pillars of the specialty. The titles were standardized and subjected to network analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 299 titles from 281 lectures and 18 instructional courses were analyzed. After preprocessing the data, 2463 words with 9384 connections qualified for network analysis. The most frequently mentioned keywords throughout the congress were 'Surgery', 'Breast', 'Reconstruction', 'Flap', 'Patient', 'Tissue', and 'Therapy'. Locations contributing the highest number of abstracts were Ludwigshafen, Hanover, Leipzig, and Munich.

CONCLUSION

In the era of big data, network analysis provides the ability to identify underlying structures and nodes in multidimensional, complex datasets. This study demonstrates the useful application of network analysis to identify thematic focuses and connections at the current DGPRÄC and VDÄPC annual meeting. Sites of intensified research could thus be identified.

Impact of Comorbidities on Sensory Return After Breast Reconstruction

PURPOSE

Breast anesthesia after mastectomy and reconstruction has been an ongoing concern with few improvements made in recent years. At present, there is a lack of studies evaluating the impact of comorbidities on sensation restoration. Identifying risk factors (RF) will be helpful with preoperative counseling.

METHODS

This was a prospective study on patients who underwent mastectomy and immediate implant-based or neurotized deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap-based reconstruction. Neurosensory testing was performed at predefined time points using a pressure specified device. Patients were stratified based on reconstruction type and comorbidities, including obesity (≥30 kg/m2), age (>55 years), hypertension, alcohol use, and smoking status. Sensory comparisons among the comorbidity groups were conducted using unpaired 2-sample t tests.

RESULTS

A total of 239 patients were included in this study with 109 patients in the implant cohort and 131 patients in the DIEP cohort. One patient underwent bilateral reconstruction using both reconstructive modalities. Preoperatively, age older than 55 years was identified as an RF for reduced breast sensation in the implant cohort (difference in threshold, 10.7 g/mm2), whereas obesity was identified as an RF in the DIEP cohort (difference in threshold, 8 g/mm2). During the first 2 years postreconstruction, age older than 55 years and tobacco use history were found to be negatively correlated with breast sensation for both cohorts. With DIEP reconstruction specifically, obesity was identified as an additional RF during the early postoperative period. Of note, none of the comorbidities were found to be long-term RFs for reduced breast sensitivity. All breast sensation levels returned to comparable levels across all comorbidities by 4 years postreconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Currently, various comorbidities have been recognized as RFs for several postoperative complications including extended postoperative stay, necrosis, infection, and reoperation. However, our findings suggest that, although age, smoking history, and obesity showed transient associations with reduced breast sensation during the initial years postreconstruction, they play no role in the long-term potential of sensory nerve regeneration.

An Innovative and Highly Efficient Single-Port Endoscopic Nipple-/Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Dual-Plane Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Study from a Single Institution

BACKGROUND

The difficulty in creating and maintaining a stable workspace of the breast makes endoscopic nipple-/skin-spring mastectomy (E-N/SSM) develop slowly. This study aims to report the preliminary results of a novel endoscopic technique for N/SSM followed by dual-plane direct-to-implant (DP-DTI) breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database was reviewed that included patients who underwent single-axillary-incision E-N/SSM and DP-DTI breast reconstruction from September 2020 to April 2021 at a single institution by three surgeons. The data were collected prospectively and analyzed to determine the efficacy, feasibility, safety, and esthetic results of the operation, as well as quality of life (QoL).

RESULTS

During the study period, a total of 68 E-N/SSM and DP-DTI reconstruction procedures through a single axillary incision were performed in 63 female patients. Among all the procedures, the majority were performed for grade 1-3 ptotic breasts (n =46, 73.0%). During the median follow-up of 26.5 months, the major and minor surgical complication rates were 1.6% (1/63) and 9.5% (6/63), respectively. The cosmetic complication rate was 14.3%. One patient suffered local recurrence 4 months postoperation. The average scores in patient-reported outcomes at 2 years postoperation of satisfaction with breast (66.57), psychosocial well-being (75.93) and sexual well-being (56.29) were not significantly different compared with the baseline, except for physical well-being: chest (69.85).

CONCLUSIONS

The proposed procedure for E-N/SSM and DP-DTI breast reconstruction is feasible, time-saving and safe with good outcomes in terms of cosmetic results and QoL and expands the indications of DTI reconstruction to ptotic breasts, making it easier to popularize.

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 .

Prepectoral versus Submuscular Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Matched-Pair Comparison of Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common reconstructive approach after mastectomy. Prepectoral implants offer advantages over submuscular implants, such as less animation deformity, pain, weakness, and postradiation capsular contracture. However, clinical outcomes after prepectoral reconstruction are debated. The authors performed a matched-cohort analysis of outcomes after prepectoral and submuscular reconstruction at a large academic medical center.

METHODS

Patients treated with implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy from January of 2018 through October of 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients were propensity score exact matched to control demographic, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative differences. Outcomes assessed included surgical-site occurrences, capsular contracture, and explantation of either expander or implant. Subanalysis was done on infections and secondary reconstructions.

RESULTS

A total of 634 breasts were included (prepectoral, 197; submuscular, 437). A total of 292 breasts were matched (146 prepectoral:146 submuscular) and analyzed for clinical outcomes. Prepectoral reconstructions were associated with greater rates of SSI (prepectoral, 15.8%; submuscular, 3.4%; P < 0.001), seroma (prepectoral, 26.0%; submuscular, 10.3%; P < 0.001), and explantation (prepectoral, 23.3%; submuscular, 4.8%; P < 0.001). Subanalysis of infections revealed that prepectoral implants have shorter time to infection, deeper infections, and more Gram-negative infections, and are more often treated surgically (all P < 0.05). There have been no failures of secondary reconstructions after explantation in the entire population at a mean follow-up of 20.1 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction is associated with higher rates of infection, seroma, and explantation compared with submuscular reconstructions. Infections of prepectoral implants may need different antibiotic management to avoid explantation. Secondary reconstruction after explantation can result in long-term success.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Do we need acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral breast reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) are commonly used in prepectoral breast reconstruction. However, ADM is associated with high cost and potentially infection and seroma. Comparative studies on prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM are limited to small, single-institution series. The purpose of this study was to perform a meta-analysis of prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM. A systematic literature review was performed to identify studies comparing prepectoral reconstruction with and without ADM using PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Pooled rates of patient demographics and outcomes were analyzed. Meta-analytic effect size estimates were calculated for reconstructive complications in studies comparing reconstruction with and without ADM. In total, 515 reconstructions from four studies were included. Most cases were nipple-sparing mastectomies and utilized tissue-expander reconstructions. Meta-analysis demonstrated no significant difference in the rate of complications between cohorts with and without ADM. Short-term complications included reconstructive failure (1.2% in ADM cohort and 2.8% in no-ADM), seroma (1.2% and 8.3%, respectively), hematoma (1.2% and 2.1%), infection (4.7% and 4.2%), and mastectomy flap ischemia and/or necrosis (2.4% and 5.2%). Long-term complications included rippling (3.3% in ADM and 5.1% in no-ADM cohorts) and capsular contracture (6.8% and 3.4%, respectively). This meta-analysis demonstrated no difference in the rate of complications between cases with and without ADM. However, the outcomes data from no-ADM reconstruction mostly reflect robust mastectomy flaps. Surgeon discretion as informed by specific clinical scenarios should guide decisions regarding the use of ADM in prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Effect of radiation therapy during surgery on postoperative wound complications after breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer: A meta-analysis

Breast remodelling is a major therapeutic choice in radical mastectomy. Breast reconstruction is regarded as a promising option for the treatment of breast cancer. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of Post mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) on postoperative wound complications in breast carcinoma. A comprehensive review of documents was conducted between the date of establishment and the 28th of August 2023. In all of the trials, patients were treated with breast cancer. The researchers chose 11 publications out of 8068 related studies. Two researchers examined these publications to satisfy the inclusion criteria. Among the 516 patients who had received radiation therapy in the course of the operation, 1772 had not received radiation therapy. The impact of radiation therapy and non-radiation therapy in breast cancer patients after breast reconstruction was reported in 8 studies, and the incidence of postoperative wound infection in non-radiation group was significantly lower (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.26-3.02 p = 0.003). In nine studies, There is not considered to have achieved statistical significance between radiation therapy and non-radiation treatment for post-operation wound dehiscence in breast cancer patients who had received chemotherapy (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.70-3.72 p = 0.27). The results of six trials demonstrated that radiation therapy and non-radiation therapy had no statistical significance on post-operation haemorrhage in breast cancer patients (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.42-2.47 p = 0.96). The results of 7 trials demonstrated that radiation therapy and non-radiation therapy had no significant impact on the post-operation of skin necrosis (OR, 1.22; 95% CI, 0.66-2.28 p = 0.53). Two trials demonstrated that those without radiation therapy were less likely than those who received radiation therapy in skin contracture in patients (OR, 7.24; 95% CI, 1.80-29.10 p = 0.005). Regarding the incidence of wound infection and cutaneous contraction was higher in the radiation group.

Same-Day Mastectomy and Immediate Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction: A 12-Year National Database Analysis and Early Postoperative Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Coronavirus disease of 2019 and rising health care costs have incentivized shorter hospital stays after mastectomies with immediate prosthetic reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative outcomes following same-day and non-same-day mastectomy with immediate prosthetic reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database from 2007 to 2019 was performed. Patients who underwent mastectomies and immediate reconstruction with tissue expanders or implants were selected and grouped based on length of stay. Univariate analysis and multivariate regression were performed to compare 30-day postoperative outcomes between length-of-stay groups.

RESULTS

A total of 45,451 patients were included: 1508 had same-day surgery (SDS) and 43,942 were admitted for 1 or more night (non-SDS). There was no significant difference in overall 30-day postoperative complications between SDS and non-SDS following immediate prosthetic reconstruction. SDS was not a predictor of complications (OR, 1.1; P = 0.346), whereas tissue expander reconstruction decreased odds of morbidity compared with direct-to-implant reconstruction (OR, 0.77; P < 0.001). Among patients who had SDS, smoking was significantly associated with early complications on multivariate analysis (OR, 1.85; P = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an up-to-date assessment of the safety of mastectomies with immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction that captures recent advancements. Postoperative complication rates are similar between same-day discharge and at least 1-night stay, suggesting that same-day procedures may be safe for appropriately selected patients.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Is a soft tissue reinforcing mesh necessary in immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction for early breast cancer in patients with low-volume breast? A single-center, retrospective Chinese clinical study

It is controversial as to whether soft tissue reinforcement mesh should be used for immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy for low-volume breast early breast cancer (LVBEBC) in Chinese adult women. We collected data on 89 patients with LVBEBC who underwent such a surgery and divided them into two groups: 39 patients in the totally subpectoral prosthesis-only breast reconstruction group (simple group) and 50 patients in the prosthesis-combined titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TCPM) group (or the so-called "dual plane" or "mesh-assisted partially subpectoral breast reconstruction group") (combined group). The results demonstrated no difference in operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative complications between the two groups; however, total drainage volume and extubation time were less and shorter, respectively, in the combined group. The median follow-up time was 18.6 months without local recurrence or distant metastasis in both groups. At 24 months after surgery, the excellent and good rates of breast reconstruction were higher in the combined group. However, patients' BMI, breast morphology, and breast volume of 300 mL or more had an effect on the shape of the reconstructed breast; in addition, in patients with higher BMI, conical breast morphology, and breast volume over 300 mL, the shape of the breast was more perfect with the prosthesis combined with TCPM reconstruction.Trial registration: This retrospective study was "retrospectively registered" in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of South China University of Technology of China on March 15, 2022 (No. 2022018) and in the National Medical Research Registry filing system of China ( https://www.medicalresearch.org.cn ) (No. MR-44-22-003618).

The Timing of Acute and Late Complications Following Mastectomy and Implant-based Reconstruction

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Implant-based breast reconstruction is a common plastic surgery procedure with well-documented clinical outcomes. Despite this, the natural history and timing of key complication endpoints are not well described. The goal of this study is to determine when patients are most likely to experience specific adverse events after implant-based reconstruction.

METHODS

Retrospective consecutive series of patients who received mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction over a 6-year period were included. Complications and unfavorable outcomes including hematoma, seroma, wound infection, skin flap necrosis, capsular contracture, implant rippling, and implant loss were identified. A time-to-event analysis was performed and Cox regression models identified patient and treatment characteristics associated with each outcome.

RESULTS

Of 1473 patients and 2434 total reconstructed breasts, 785 complications/unfavorable outcomes were identified. The 12-month cumulative incidence of hematoma was 1.4%, seroma: 4.3%, infection: 3.2%, skin flap necrosis: 3.9%, capsular contracture: 5.7%, implant rippling: 7.1%, and implant loss: 3.9%. In the analysis, 332/785 (42.3%) complications occurred within 60 days of surgery; 94% of hematomas, 85% of skin necrosis events, and 75% of seromas occurred during this period. Half of all infections and implant losses also occurred within 60 days. Of the remaining complications, 94% of capsular contractures and 93% of implant rippling occurred >60 days from surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Complications following mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction exhibit a discrete temporal distribution. These data represent the first comprehensive study of the timing of adverse events following implant-based reconstruction. These findings are immediately useful to guide postoperative care, follow-up, and clinical trial design.

Risk stratification in subpectoral to prepectoral pocket conversion to reduce post-reconstruction animation deformity

BACKGROUND

Animation deformity is a morbid complication that impacts women undergoing subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction. Transferring implants from the subpectoral to prepectoral space, pocket conversion, can be performed to minimize this issue. While prior literature has evaluated outcomes associated with this procedure, we investigated the risk factors most commonly associated with post-conversion complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort investigation of women undergoing prepectoral pocket conversion. Pre-conversion clinical characteristics and surgical complications (major and minor) were collected. Predictors for postoperative complications were identified using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Odds ratios (OR) and adjusted odds ratios (aOR) are presented with 95% confidence intervals, and p-values were assessed at α = 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 34 patients (63 breasts) were included. Pocket conversion relieved animation deformity in all breasts. The overall rates of major and minor complications were 14.3% (n = 9/63) and 34.9% (n = 22/63), respectively, by mean follow-up of 11.1 months. After adjusting for confounders, pre-conversion implant rupture (OR= 6.00, CI= 0.99-34.58; aOR= 12.8, CI= 1.15-170.32) and duration of implant placement (OR=1.35, CI= 1.07-1.78; aOR= 1.1, CI= 1.00-1.21) were found to be significant predictors of major postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

With a fairly inclusive patient population, this series provides data for improved risk stratification of patients considering conversion to relieve animation deformity. Interestingly, traditional risk factors (namely, body mass index and smoking status) were not significant predictors for postoperative complications, suggesting that conversion may be safe in high-risk patients. Such data support more informed preoperative counseling and wider application of this procedure.

The Impact of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy on the Outcomes of Prepectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction is the mainstay treatment choice for patients subjected to a mastectomy. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is deemed to be a promising alternative to subpectoral reconstruction. Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is necessary for locoregional recurrence control and to improve the disease-free survival rate in locally advanced breast cancer. This systematic review and meta-analysis study was designed to reveal the surgical, aesthetic, and oncological outcomes of prepectoral IBBR after PMRT.

METHODS

An extensive literature search was performed from inception to March 28, 2022. All clinical studies that included patients who were subjected to prepectoral IBBR and PMRT were included. Studies that included patients who received radiation therapy before prepectoral IBBR were excluded.

RESULTS

This systematic review included six articles encompassing 1234 reconstructed breasts. Of them, 391 breasts were subjected to PMRT, while 843 breasts were not subjected. Irradiated breasts were more susceptible to develop wound infection (RR 2.49; 95% 1.43, 4.35; P = 0.001) and capsular contracture (RR 5.17; 95% 1.93, 13.80; P = 0.001) than the non-irradiated breasts. Furthermore, irradiated breasts were more vulnerable to losing implants (RR 2.89; 95% 1.30, 6.39; P = 0.009) than the non-irradiated breast. There was no significant difference between both groups regarding the risk of implant extrusion (RR 1.88; 95% 0.20, 17.63; P = 0.58).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prepectorally IBBR and PMRT were more vulnerable to developing poor outcomes. This included a higher risk of breast-related and implant-related adverse events.

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 .

Braxon®-assisted prepectoral breast reconstruction: A decade later

We are sitting on the cusp of the bioengineered breast era, in which implant-based breast reconstruction is seeing a growing trend and biotechnology research progressively empowers clinical practice. As never before, the choice of biomaterials has acquired great importance for achieving reconstructive outcomes, and the increase in the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in the field of senology tells us a story of profound upheaval and progress. With the advent of prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR), plenty of devices have been proposed to wrap the silicone prosthesis, either completely or partially. However, this has caused a great deal of confusion and dissent with regard to the adoption of feasible reconstructive strategies as well as the original scientific rationale underlying the prepectoral approach. Braxon^® is the very first device that made prepectoral implant positioning possible, wrapping around the prosthesis and exerting the proven ADM regenerative potential at the implant–tissue interface, taking advantage of the body's physiological healing mechanisms. To date, the Braxon^® method is among the most studied and practiced worldwide, and more than 50 publications confirm the superior performance of the device in the most varied clinical scenarios. However, a comprehensive record of the working of this pioneering device is still missing. Therefore, our aim with this review is to lay a structured knowledge of surgery with BRAXON^® and to provide a decision-making tool in the field of PPBR through a complete understanding on the very first device for prepectoral, one decade after its introduction.

Aesthetic Limitations in Direct-to-Implant Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Prepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction has become an alternative to staged subpectoral expander-based reconstruction. Although the surgical safety of this technique has been shown, aesthetic limitations have not been well-described. This article reports aesthetic limitations and elucidates risk factors that may predispose patients toward developing unfavorable outcomes following direct-to-implant prepectoral breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed, identifying patients who underwent prepectoral, direct-to-implant breast reconstruction from June of 2016 to June of 2019. Aesthetic limitations assessed included capsular contracture, rippling, implant malposition, and implant flipping.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-four consecutive women representing 334 breasts underwent immediate reconstruction performed by a single plastic surgeon. A midlateral incision was used in 185 breasts (55.4 percent) and the Wise pattern in 95 breasts (28.8 percent). The mean follow-up time was 30.5 months (45.3 to 18.3 months). Significant capsular contracture (grade 3 to 4) was noted in 27 breasts (8.1 percent), implant flipping in four breasts (1.2 percent), implant displacement in five breasts (1.5 percent), major rippling in nine breasts (2.7 percent), and minor rippling in 17 breasts (5.1 percent). The use of acellular dermal matrix had no significant effect on the aesthetic outcomes. In comparing breasts with postmastectomy radiation, there was a significant difference in the presence of minor rippling and capsular contracture ( p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This cohort represents the largest, single-surgeon, direct-to-implant prepectoral database in the literature. This report shows that aesthetic limitations were comparable to those seen with other forms of reconstruction. Complications did not differ in terms of acellular dermal matrix use. Certain factors can predispose patients to developing unfavorable aesthetic outcomes.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Breast Implant Illness: Surgical, Autoimmune, and Breast Reconstruction Associations

Breast implant illness refers to a combination of different symptoms related to breast implant surgery, including fatigue, brain fog, and arthralgias. This malaise occurs after cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgeries, although it has not been proven to be a disease. Even recent studies have reported concluding statements of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment as unclear and widely unknown. Therefore, this review aimed to determine the associations between the manifestations of breast implant illness in surgery and breast reconstruction, as well as the autoimmune responses involved. Complications associated with breast implants include breast pain, capsular contracture, infections, as well as other manifestations specific to breast reconstruction. Moreover, patients with implants may present with new-onset systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, and connective tissue diseases. However, the incidence of capsular contracture has steadily decreased with each generation of implants, particularly since the development of textured implants, as well as with the use of antibiotics and antiseptic pocket irrigation. However, the incidence of anaplastic large cell lymphoma has increased with the use of textured implants. Remarkably, the autoimmune response to these implants remains unclear. Therefore, close follow-up, careful observation of any symptom presentation, and evidence-based treatment decisions are necessary for patients with breast implants.

Do We Need Support in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction? Comparing Outcomes with and without ADM

Background:

The majority of two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction has been described utilizing acellular dermal matrix (ADM). Although reports of prepectoral breast reconstruction without ADM exist, there is a paucity of comparative studies.

Methods:

A single-institution retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients undergoing immediate prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction with tissue expanders from 2017 to 2019. Short-term reconstructive and aesthetic complications were compared between cases that utilized ADM for support and those that did not.

Results:

In total, 76 cases (51 patients) were identified, of which 35 cases utilized ADM and 41 did not. Risk factors and demographics were similar between the two cohorts with the exception of body mass index, which was higher in the ADM cohort (29.3 versus 25.4, P = 0.011). Average follow-up length was also longer in patients who received ADM (20.3 versus 12.3 months, P < 0.001). Intraoperative expander fill was higher in patients who did not receive ADM (296.8 cm³ versus 151.4 cm³, P < 0.001) though final implant size was comparable in both cohorts (P = 0.584). There was no significant difference in the rate of any complication between the ADM and no ADM cohorts (25.7% versus 17.1%, respectively P = 0.357), including major mastectomy flap necrosis (P = 0.245), major infection (P = 1.000), seroma (P = 0.620), expander explantation (P = 1.000), capsular contracture (P = 1.000), implant dystopia (P = 1.000), and rippling (P = 0.362).

Conclusions:

Immediate two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction with tissue expanders has comparable rates of short-term complications with or without ADM support. Safety of prepectoral expander placement without ADM may warrant more selective ADM use in these cases.

Successful Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction in a Patient With Systemic Sclerosis

Patients with connective tissue diseases have been shown to be at higher risk for complications after surgery. In this report, we describe a case of a patient with long-standing, stable systemic sclerosis (SS), diagnosed approximately 28 years ago, who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with prepectoral tissue-expander placement. She subsequently had uneventful implant-based reconstruction with adjunctive fat grafting. To our knowledge, this is the first reported case of implant-based prepectoral reconstruction after mastectomy in a patient with SS.

Comparison of subpectoral versus dual-plane implant based immediate breast reconstruction after nipple-areola sparing mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Selection of implant pocket and size is a dilemma for surgeons especially if radiation therapy is envisaged after implant based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The aim of this study is to compare complication rates between subpectoral and the dual plane polyglactin mesh supported IBR after nipple-areola sparing mastectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

Reconstructive analysis of 208 breasts of 190 patients with breast cancer undergoing implant based IBR at a single university hospital were evaluated. The patients were reconstructed with either dual-plane polyglactin mesh supported (n=91) or subpectoral (n=117) implant based IBR after nipple-areola sparing mastectomy. Demographic data, and postoperative complications were compared.

RESULTS

The mean age was 43.3 years. Early complications encountered in 12% (n=25) and late complications occurred in 18% (n=37) of breasts. Both early (13,7% vs 9.9%, P=0.406) and late complications (24.8% vs 8.8%, P=0.003) were more common in subpectoral group, but only late complication occurrence rate was statistically significant. Capsular contracture (P=0.000), inframammary fold problems (P=0.010), bottoming-out (P=0.370), mechanical shift (P=0.036) and animation deformity (P=0.007) were all more common in subpectoral group. Only rippling deformity (P=0.011) was more common in dual plane group.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual plane IBR has acceptable complication rates compared to subpectoral IBR. It is associated with less capsular contracture, fewer animation and bottoming-out deformity and better inframammary fold appearance.

Direct-to-Implant, Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Single-Surgeon Experience with 201 Consecutive Patients

BACKGROUND

The resurgence of prepectoral breast reconstruction has brought strict patient inclusion and exclusion criteria by numerous authors. This article provides an overview of a single surgeon's experience with 201 patients, 313 breasts using immediate, direct-to-implant prepectoral breast reconstruction. The article compares surgical outcomes of different patient cohorts to elucidate risk factors that may predispose patients toward developing complications.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed, identifying all patients who underwent prepectoral, direct-to-implant breast reconstruction from June of 2016 to June of 2018.

RESULTS

A total of 201 patients representing 313 breasts were included. A midlateral incision was used in 157 breasts (50.2 percent), followed by a skin-reducing, Wise-pattern in 90 breasts (28.8 percent). Acellular dermal matrix was used in 243 breasts (77.6 percent), free nipple grafts were used in 39 breasts (12.5 percent), and postmastectomy radiation therapy was used in 58 breasts (18.5 percent). Complications requiring operative intervention occurred in 24 breasts (7.7 percent), and minor complications occurred in 23 breasts (7.3 percent). There were no significant differences in complication rates for (1) acellular dermal matrix use versus non-acellular dermal matrix use, (2) Wise-pattern versus other incision, or (3) postmastectomy radiotherapy (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This represents the largest single-surgeon, direct-to-implant prepectoral cohort in the literature. Surgical complications did not differ with acellular dermal matrix use, incision selection, and the use of postmastectomy radiation therapy. There may be an association between acellular dermal matrix use and major complications and radiotherapy with minor complications.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Two-Staged Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Long-Term Outcome Study in a Young Population

Background and objectives: Differences in patient anatomy and physiology exist between young and older patients undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Breast cancer has been described as being more aggressive, more likely to receive radiation, contralateral mastectomy, as well as bilateral reconstruction in young patients. Our purpose is to report long-term experience on two-staged implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) in young females, with complication sub-analysis based on obesity and adjuvant radiation. Materials and Methods: Retrospective chart review of all consecutive young patients who underwent two-staged IBR at our institution, between 2000 and 2016, was performed. Patients between 15 and 40 years old with least 1-year follow-up were included. Univariate logistic regression models and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were created. Results: Overall 594 breasts met our inclusion criteria. The mean age was 34 years, and the median follow-up was 29.6 months. Final IBR was achieved in 98% of breasts. Overall, 12% of breasts had complications, leading to explantations of 5% of the devices. Adjuvant radiation was followed by higher rates of total device explantations (p = 0.003), while obese patients had higher rates of total complications (p < 0.001). For each point increase in BMI, the odds of developing complications increased 8.1% (p < 0.001); the cutoff BMI to predict higher complications was 24.81 kg/m². Conclusions: This population demonstrates high successful IBR completion and low explantation rates. These data suggest that obese women and those with planned adjuvant radiation deserve special counseling about their higher risk of complications.

Surgical Outcomes of Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction in Young Women

Background:

Two-staged implant-based reconstruction (IBR) is the most common breast reconstructive modality. Recently, technological and surgical advances have encouraged surgeons to revisit prepectoral IBR. Data comparing prepectoral against subpectoral IBR in women under the age of 40 are lacking.

Methods:

Retrospective chart review of patients under the age of 40 years old, who underwent immediate 2-staged IBR at our institution, was performed. Patient’s demographics, clinical characteristics, operative details, and early surgical outcomes of prepectoral and subpectoral reconstruction were compared. Data with values of P < 0.05 were considered statistically significant.

Results:

Between 2012 and 2016, 100 patients (187 breasts) who underwent prepectoral and 69 patients (124 breasts) who underwent subpectoral IBR were included. Median follow-up was 17.9 and 17.5 months in the prepectoral and subpectoral groups, respectively. Total number of complications including both stages of reconstruction was 20 (10.7%) and 19 (15.3%) in the prepectoral and subpectoral groups, respectively (P = 0.227). Specific complications, including hematoma, seroma, skin flap necrosis, wound dehiscence, and breast infections, were not significantly different among groups. Ten (5.4%) devices, including implants and tissue expander, required explantation in the prepectoral group and 8 (6.5%) in the subpectoral group (P = 0.683). Explantation was most commonly due to infection (n = 14), and all of them occurred during the first stage (P < 0.001).

Conclusions:

Early complications and implant explantation rates are comparable among prepectoral and subpectoral breast reconstruction in women under 40 years old. Based on these results, we believe that prepectoral IBR is a safe, reliable, and promising reconstructive option.

Breast Reconstruction Actualized in Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Direct-to-implant, Prepectoral Polyurethane Positioning: Early Experience and Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy has been the most common breast reconstruction procedure performed, for both breast cancer treatment and prophylactically. Subpectoral implant placement with partial detachment of the pectoralis major muscle has been the procedure of choice for staged reconstruction and direct-to-implantation. Prepectoral implant placement has recently increased in popularity among plastic surgeons owing to the high rates of animation deformity, loss of muscle function, and chronic pain observed with submuscular implant placement. Acellular dermal matrices or synthetic meshes have been used for implant coverage and support to avoid capsular contracture and implant visibility. In the present study, we have introduced breast reconstruction actualized in nipple-sparing mastectomy and direct-to-implant with prepectoral polyurethane positioning (BRAND4P).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 34 nipple-sparing mastectomies and immediate direct-to-implant breast reconstructions with prepectoral polyurethane-coated implant placement were performed in 21 patients (13 bilateral and 8 unilateral). The implant was placed subcutaneously in the exact place of the excised breast parenchyma with no further coverage.

RESULTS

After a mean follow-up of 4 months, no major complications had been observed. No patient presented with animation deformity or grade III-IV capsular contracture. Patient satisfaction, assessed using the BREAST-Q, was excellent.

CONCLUSIONS

The BRAND4P method represents a novel prepectoral approach and a feasible alternative to subpectoral implant placement among the available implant-based breast reconstruction techniques.

[Mastectomy and immediate reconstruction: Indications, techniques and decision algorithm]

Immediate breast reconstruction indications extend to infiltrating carcinomas, due to new matrix implant coverage techniques and the development of perforator flaps. These techniques allow adjuvant treatments. However, the decision of immediate reconstruction must be discussed with the oncological multidisciplinary team and the benefits/risks must also be evaluated in relation to the morphology of the patients and their co-morbidities. The chosen type of mastectomy: conventional or skin sparing and/or nipple sparing depends on the shape and volume of the breast, the localization of the tumor in the breast and the distance from the nipple areola complex (NAC). We describe an algorithm to allow, in the case of therapeutic mastectomy with or without adjuvant radiotherapy, an immediate reconstruction with implants or free or pedicled flaps.