Lightweight implants in breast reconstruction

OBJECTIVE

Since the first use of silicone implants by Cronin in 1962, there have been several attempts to introduce alternative filling materials for breast implants on the market. A promising new development are lightweight implants, whose filler material is one third lighter than conventional silicone gel. While these implants have been used primarily for aesthetic augmentation, a benefit could be expected particularly in post-mastectomy reconstruction.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Since 2019, 92 operations using lightweight implants have been performed at our clinic, 61 of them for breast reconstruction after mastectomy. These have been compared to 92 breast reconstructions using conventional silicone implants.

RESULTS

The average volume of the lightweight implants was 30% higher than of the conventional implants (452 ml resp. 347 ml), whereas the implant weight was comparable in both groups (317 g resp. 347 g). Grade 3-4 capsular fibrosis was seen in 6 cases in both groups; revision was required 9 times (lightweight implants) and 7 times (conventional silicone implants) during the follow-up period.

DISCUSSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to investigate the use of lightweight implants in breast reconstruction. With exception of the filler material, the implants used in the two groups were comparable in shape and surface. The inserted lightweight implants had a greater volume but nearly the same weight as the conventional implants and were used in patients with a higher body mass index. Thus, lightweight implants were preferred in patients whose reconstruction required a larger implant volume.

CONCLUSION

Lightweight implants are a new alternative for breast reconstruction especially in case that larger implant volume is demanded. The increased complication rate has to be verified in further studies.

Comparison of analog and digitally evaluated volume of the female breast in reconstructive breast surgery. Validation of a noninvasive measurement method with 3D camera1

BACKGROUND

Reconstructive surgery is established as a standard treatment option after mastectomy due to cancer. It is crucial to patients to achieve a natural and symmetric looking breast through reconstruction. Anthropometric measurements are used to assess the objective symmetry of the breast, which are prone to errors and difficult to reproduce.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this work is to validate breast volumetry using three-dimensional surface imaging.

METHODS

We compared preoperatively analog and digitally evaluated volume of the breast with our gold standard, direct water displacement measurement of the mastectomy specimen. We examined 34 breast specimens in total.

RESULTS

Each measurement method (Breast Sculptor, VAM, Breast-V) for breast volume/mass determination demonstrates acceptable agreement ranges when compared with resected volumes and masses. The strongest volumetry instrument is Breast Sculptor (digital), the weakest is Breast-V (analog).

CONCLUSIONS

3D surface imaging is a quick, effective, and convenient method to evaluate breast shape and volume. The accuracy, reproducibility, and reliability of 3D surface imaging were comparable with MRI in our study.This takes us a step closer to the long-term goal of establishing robust instruments to plan breast reconstructive surgery, achieve better surgical results, and contribute to quality assurance in breast surgery.

Comparison of skin sensitivity following breast reconstruction with three different techniques: Autologous fat grafting, DIEP flap and expander/implant1

BACKGROUND

Autologous fat grafting (AFG) has been established over the past two decades as an additive technique during and after breast reconstruction. Complete reconstruction of the breast mound with AFG alone represents an exceptional technique that has been published mostly in case reports or in studies with limited cases.The purpose of this study is to investigate the influence of three different techniques for breast reconstruction on the recovery of skin sensitivity at the reconstructed breast.

METHODS

The study included 30 patients after mastectomy following breast cancer. Three groups were examined: A) breast reconstruction by autologous fat grafting (AFG), B) breast reconstruction by deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap (DIEP) and C) breast reconstruction by expander/implant (TE).Biometric data were compared; sensitivity tests were performed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments.The non-operated, healthy contralateral breasts of the patients were used as a reference.

RESULTS

While the traditional reconstruction techniques by microsurgical anastomosed perforator flap or expander/implant showed a strongly decreased or completely missing sensitivity of the skin, the tests after reconstruction by AFG represented high values of sensory recovery, which came close to the reference group of non-operated breasts.

CONCLUSION

To our knowledge, this is the first study to compare skin sensitivity after AFG-based reconstruction to established techniques for breast reconstruction. We could demonstrate in a limited group of patients, that breast reconstruction by autologous fat grafting can achieve higher values of skin sensitivity compared to traditional techniques.

WITHDRAWN: The use of integrated indocyanine green fluorescence microscope camera for intraoperative lymphography of supermicrosurgery

Ahead of Print article withdrawn by publisher.