Osseous genioplasty versus chin implants: early complications and patient satisfaction

Osseous genioplasty and chin augmentation with implants are the two main treatment options for retrognathia. This retrospective cohort study was performed to compare the prevalence of complications and patient satisfaction following osseous genioplasty and chin augmentation by implant. Eighty patients were included: 38 underwent advancement osseous genioplasty and 42 received chin implants (alloplastic, either Medpor or Silastic) intraorally or extraorally. The patients were assessed for complications 12 months after surgery, including neurosensory disturbances, infection or extrusion, wound dehiscence, and the need for reoperation. Patient satisfaction was evaluated using a visual analogue scale. The infection rate was significantly higher in the chin implant group than in the genioplasty group (P = 0.028). Moreover, dehiscence and the need for reoperation appeared to be more common following chin augmentation with implants. However, there was no significant difference in the prevalence of neurosensory disturbances between the two groups (P = 0.137). In the chin implants group, the extraoral approach resulted in a lower dehiscence rate than the intraoral approach. Patients in the genioplasty group had significantly higher satisfaction scores than those in the chin implant group (P = 0.001). Overall, the rates of the complications assessed were lower and patient satisfaction was higher after osseous genioplasty when compared to chin augmentation with implants.

Breast reconstruction with silicone prosthesis and acellular dermal matrix of porcine origin: Retrospective study of 84 cases

INTRODUCTION

Breast reconstruction (BR) using a prosthesis implant (PI) associated with an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is a known method that has been the subject of discussion in recent years. The objective of this study was to quantify the rate of PI removal after BR using prosthesis combined with ADM, and to identify the risk factors in the event of removal.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study conducted between 2010 and 2015. Inclusion criteria were patients who had undergone immediate (IBR) or delayed (DBR) breast reconstruction with placement of a PI associated with porcine ADM. The primary endpoint was the postoperative removal of the PI.

RESULTS

In all, 84 reconstructions were performed. The mean age of the population was 57.5 years. 25.9% of the patients were active smokers at the time of surgery. 89.5% of patients had previously benefited from ipsilateral breast radiation therapy (IBRT) in DBR, 10.5% in IBR. The PI deposition rate, all BR combined, was 21.4%. It was 52.17% in smokers and 9.84% in non-smokers (P<0.0001), making smoking an independent risk factor for reconstruction failure (hazard ratio (HR)=7.4, 95%CI [2.64-20.9]). IBRT was also a risk factor for PI removal, especially when performed after IBR (HR=8.1, 95%CI [1.1-62.1]).

CONCLUSION

Smoking and adjuvant IBRT are risk factors for failure of reconstruction by PI associated with ADM. This type of reconstruction should be selected for non-smokers who have not undergone IBRT and therefore could be a therapeutic alternative in the BR panel.