Acellular Dermal Matrix without Basement Membrane in Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has become popular in various reconstructive procedures of different anatomic regions. There are different needs depending on the clinical application, including breast, abdominal wall, and any other soft-tissue reconstruction. Removal of the basement membrane, which consists of collagen fibers, may help achieve natural and soft breast reconstruction, which requires highly elastic ADMs. Given the lack of knowledge of the effectiveness of ADM without the basement membrane, the authors compared the clinical outcomes of ADMs with and without basement membrane in breast reconstruction. METHODS: The authors conducted a single-blind randomized controlled trial to evaluate differences in clinical outcomes. The patients were randomized into 2 groups: ADM with or without basement membrane. Both groups underwent immediate prepectoral direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Demographic characteristics, surgical outcomes, and breast shape change using nipple position were compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: A total of 56 patients were divided into 2 groups: ADM with basement membrane (n = 30 [53.6%]) or ADM without basement membrane (n = 26 [46.4%]). Clinical and surgical characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. The authors detected no statistically significant differences in the overall rate of complications or breast shape change between the 2 groups. However, the rate of seromas was higher in the ADM with basement membrane group than in the ADM without basement membrane group (10% versus 0%; P = 0.09). CONCLUSIONS: The 2 groups showed similar surgical outcomes. ADM without basement membrane in implant-based breast reconstruction was safe, and had mechanical properties of lower tensile strength and higher elasticity. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Early post-operative outcome of pre-pectoral implant-based immediate total breast reconstruction with Polyglactin 910 (Vicryl™) mesh - low cost solution for a low-middle income country.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of breast cancer in Pakistan has been rising with approximately one third of these patients requiring mastectomy. Among breast reconstruction treatment options, the use of Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) for pre-pectoral breast implant surgery has proven effective with improved cosmetic outcome. However, due to high cost it cannot be regularly implemented in a developing country like Pakistan. An alternative to ADM, Polyglactin 910 (Vicryl™, Ethicon) mesh has been introduced in pre-pectoral breast reconstructive surgery which has shown to be almost 10 times lower in cost. We set out to determine the frequency of early postoperative complications when using Polyglactin 910 mesh for pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction surgery. METHODS: A single centre, retrospective, chart review was conducted, and a total 28 women were included in the study. Thirty-two pre-pectoral implant-based mastectomies with Polyglactin 910 mesh were performed. Early post-operative outcomes (within 12 months of procedure) including duration of antibiotic use, post-operative infection, implant displacement, flap necrosis, seroma formation, wound dehiscence, hematoma formation, capsular contracture and reconstruction failure, were recorded. RESULTS: Only 4 (12.5%) women experienced early post-operative morbidity. One patient developed a wound dehiscence, which eventually led to reconstruction failure and removal of the implant. Another patient had seroma formation and flap necrosis. None of the patients developed postoperative implant displacement, hematoma formation or capsular contracture in the early post-operative period. CONCLUSION: This study reveals that early post-operative outcomes with Polyglactin 910 mesh in breast reconstructive surgery are few, thus making it a cost effective, reliable, and safe treatment option, especially in developing countries like Pakistan.

A Pericardium Bovine Matrix Pocket in DTI Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Breast reconstructive surgery has evolved significantly over the years. One of the recent advancements is the use of prepectoral implants in combination with synthetic and biological material as a natural and effective coverage. To date, there is little published data on breast reconstruction using acellular bovine pericardium matrix and most concern submuscular breast reconstruction. This study aimed to describe the multicentric-multisurgeon experience in performing direct to implant (DTI) prepectoral breast reconstructions using acellular bovine pericardium matrix (ABPM) pocket. A retrospective multicentric data collection of the all the immediate prepectoral breast reconstructions using acellular bovine pericardium was carried out by the authors. Surgical data including type of mastectomy, axillary surgery, type and size of implant, size of ABPM, duration of surgery were collected for each patient. Postoperative data including adjuvant treatments, complications, necessity to perform other interventions, patient's satisfaction were collected. Cosmetic results were also evaluated by 7 different observers at minimum 1 year follow-up. A total of 65 breast reconstruction were included in the study. Mean follow up was 21.3 months. Average surgical time was 1,42 hours. Minor complications occurred in 4 breasts; major complications occurred in 2 breasts. After 6 months follow-up, 7 patients underwent fat grafting to correct any rippling and /or wrinkling. Breast aesthetic and patients reported outcomes were satisfactory. Not significant capsular contracture was noted at the follow up control. To date, this is the largest study about prepectoral breast reconstruction with ABPM. On the basis of our results, prepectoral breast reconstruction ABPM assisted is a reliable, safe and suitable option providing good patient satisfaction outcomes.

Impact of Hematoma on Capsular Contracture: A Comparative Study of Smooth and Textured Implants in a Miniature Pig Model.

BACKGROUND: Capsular contracture is a significant complication following mammaplasty, with varying incidence rates and symptoms. The etiology of capsular contracture is multifactorial, with postoperative hematoma recognized as a potential contributing factor. OBJECTIVES: In this study we aimed to investigate the impact of postoperative hematoma on capsular contracture following mammaplasty, utilizing pig models and modified biomechanical testing. We sought to compare the severity of capsular contracture between smooth and textured implants in the presence of hematoma, assess the biomechanical properties of the capsules, and explore the histological and molecular changes associated with the condition. METHODS: The study involved 5 female miniature pigs, implanted with both smooth and textured implants. Hematoma models were established, and various methods were employed to evaluate the impact of the prosthesis surface and hematoma on capsular contracture, including ultrasound assessment, biomechanical tests, scanning electron microscopy, histological analysis, and transcriptome sequencing. RESULTS: Capsules in hematoma groups were classified as Baker III/IV, with significantly unfavorable thickness, elastic modulus, and relaxation and creep amounts compared to nonhematoma groups. Smooth implants under hematoma conditions exhibited increased muscle content and biomechanical strength of the capsule. Transcriptomic analysis highlighted differential gene expression related to muscle development and contraction in smooth implants with hematomas. CONCLUSIONS: Hematomas increase the risk of capsular contracture, with smooth implants exacerbating this effect by enhancing pathways related to muscle development and contraction. This underscores the importance of hematoma prevention and treatment strategies, particularly when placing smooth implants, to minimize the occurrence of capsular contracture. The study provides insights into the mechanisms underlying capsular contracture and offers evidence to guide surgical and postoperative management strategies.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complication Profiles of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications of distinct implant-based breast reconstruction modality for patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted on breast cancer patients with stage II-III disease who performed implant-based breast reconstruction following with PMRT between September 2016 and April 2022. The patients were categorized into two matched groups: (1) patients receiving prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) or (2) subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) followed by PMRT. Following reconstruction, the patients were further compared for PMRT with the tissue expander (PMRT-TE) versus PMRT with permanent implant (PMRT-PI). PROs were measured with BREAST-Q questionnaire. Early and late complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: A total of 55 eligible patients were recruited. Patients who underwent PBR reported significantly higher satisfaction with breasts scores (P = 0.003) compared with the SBR group. The PMRT-TE group had higher satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.001) but lower physical well-being (P = 0.029) scores compared with PMRT-PI group. Moreover, patients in SBR cohort had a higher risk of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) (20.5% vs 6.3%) and implant dislocation (48.7% vs 12.5%) than patients in PBR cohort. Patients in PMRT-PI group had a slightly higher rate of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) than PMRT-TE group (20.8% vs 12.9%). CONCLUSIONS: PBR was associated with lower rates of late complications, especially for implant dislocation, and higher satisfaction with breasts scores compared to SBR. In addition, compared to PMRT-TE with PMRT-PI, patients in PMRT-TE cohort reported superior PROs of satisfaction with breasts.

Outcomes in Subfascial Versus Subglandular Planes in Breast Augmentation: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Breast augmentation is the most commonly performed aesthetic surgery procedure in women worldwide. The use of the subfascial plane has been suggested to decrease the incidence of capsular contracture compared with the subglandular plane, while simultaneously avoiding the complication of animation deformity in the subpectoral plane. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to compare the adverse outcomes of subfascial vs subglandular planes in breast augmentation. This review was registered a priori on OSF (https://osf.io/pm92e/). A search from inception to June 2023 was performed on MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL. A hand search was also performed. All randomized and comparative cohort studies that assessed the use of the subfascial plane for breast augmentation were included. Outcomes evaluated included the incidences of seroma, hematoma, infection, rippling, capsular contracture, and revision surgery. Ten studies were included in this systematic review. Three randomized controlled trials and 7 comparative cohort studies were used for quantitative synthesis. There was a significant difference favoring subfascial compared with subglandular planes in the incidence of hematoma, rippling, and capsular contracture. All included studies had a high risk of bias. The current evidence suggests that the subfascial plane for breast augmentation decreases the risk of capsular contracture, hematoma, and rippling compared with the subglandular plane. Further randomized evidence with high methodological rigor is still required to validate these findings.

Quality of life in breast reconstruction: a comparison of lightweight and conventional breast implants.

BACKGROUND: Due to the declining mortality rates of breast carcinoma and the rising incidence of risk-reducing mastectomies, enhancing the quality of life after breast reconstructions has become an increasingly important goal. The advantages of lightweight breast implants (B-Lite®) may significantly contribute to achieving this objective. This study aims to investigate whether lightweight implants are suitable for patients undergoing breast reconstruction and could improve the quality of life in comparison to conventional implants. METHODS: In this study, we retrospectively analyzed 48 patients (38 implants in each group) who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction with either B-Lite® or conventional breast implants between 2019 and 2022 at the University Center for Plastic Surgery in Regensburg. As part of the postoperative follow-up, a clinical examination and a survey using the Breast-Q® questionnaire were conducted to evaluate the postoperative quality of life. RESULTS: The implants used were similar in weight and shape. On average, the B-Lite® implants had a higher implant volume and patients in this group had a slightly higher BMI. Patients who received B-Lite® implants showed a significantly better result regarding the sensation of sensitivity in the surgical area and the scar formation also appeared to be more favorable. However, patients with B-Lite® implants perceived their implants as more uncomfortable than those with conventional breast implants. In other terms concerning quality of life, both groups appeared similar. CONCLUSION: In summary, there are confounding factors that could influence the outcome of some aspects in this study, which could not be avoided due to the retrospective study design and the temporary suspension of B-Lite implants. Nevertheless, as the first of its kind, this study demonstrated that B-Lite implants could also be suitable for usage in breast reconstructions, thus providing an important foundation for further prospective studies to build upon.

Breast Reduction with Implants or Augmentation Reduction: Patient-Reported Outcomes from a Single-Centre Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

Background and Objectives: The correction of breast hypertrophy and ptosis with implant placement has always posed a challenge for plastic surgeons. Various methods have been devised, yielding conflicting results. The purpose of this study is to describe our surgical technique of breast reduction with silicone implants, present the safety profile of the procedure, and report patient-reported outcomes. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was performed on our case series of cosmetic breast surgery performed by the senior author between October 2020 and November 2023. Only patients who had over 300 g of breast tissue removed were included. The surgery and demographic characteristics were recorded. Patients were asked to complete a questionnaire about satisfaction with their breasts pre-operatively and after the surgery. Results: Over 745 cases were performed, and 25 were included in the analysis. In total, 78.3% of the patients presented with a Grade 3 ptosis. The mean implant size was 352.39 cc (range 300-455 cc). The breast tissue removed ranged from 312 to 657 g. The mean follow-up was 14.17 months. Only one case required revision surgery after developing capsular contracture and a waterfall deformity. Patients reported a statistically significant improvement across all domains of the questionnaire (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Breast reduction plus implants is a safe and effective alternative for patients with large ptotic breasts who wish to attain a full upper pole. It carries a similar risk profile to augmentation mastopexy and maintains its functional benefits in alleviating back, neck, and shoulder pain.

Breast reconstruction with mentor anatomical implants and the risk of implant rotation: A retrospective study of 1134 women.

BACKGROUND: Implant rotation is a known complication to breast reconstruction using anatomical implants. However, there is a lack of large studies investigating the risk of implant rotation and potential predisposing risk factors. METHOD: We reviewed the medical records of all patients who underwent breast reconstruction with Mentor anatomical implants from 2010 to 2021 at two Danish hospitals. We compared the risk of implant rotation between one- and two-stage breast reconstruction using univariate logistic regression. We analyzed the effect of biological mesh, immediate versus delayed reconstruction, and use of a higher final expander volume than the permanent implant volume on the risk of implant rotation. Finally, we analyzed the success rate of revision surgery for implant rotation. RESULTS: In total, 1134 patients were enrolled. Patients who underwent two-stage breast reconstruction (n = 720) had a significantly higher risk of implant rotation than those who underwent one-stage breast reconstruction (n = 426; 11% vs. 5%, p < 0.01). There was no significant association between implant rotation and the use of biological mesh, immediate breast reconstruction, or use of a higher final expander volume than the permanent implant volume. The success rate of revision surgery after implant rotation was 73% (62/85 rotations). CONCLUSIONS: Two-stage breast reconstruction significantly increased the risk of implant rotation compared to one-stage breast reconstruction. The overall risk of implant rotation was low and success rate of revision surgery was high. These findings suggest that anatomical implants are safe to use for breast reconstruction. However, surgeons and patients should be aware of the increased risk of implant rotation after two-stage reconstruction.

Classification of Breast Implant Malposition.

BACKGROUND: Implant malposition is a well-recognized complication of prosthetic breast implants. However, to date, no objective classification system has been described. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to perform a prospective trial of an objective and reproducible classification system for implant malposition formulated by analyzing retrospective data from a large cohort of patients with implant malposition. METHODS: The authors retrospectively analyzed the degree of medial/lateral and inferior/superior implant malposition relative to their optimal position within the breast footprint in a series of 189 breasts (n = 100 patients). An objective classification system for implant malposition was devised and then applied to a prospective cohort of 53 breasts in 28 patients with implant malposition. RESULTS: The degree of malposition in a single or combination of axes was categorized according to the distance (measured in centimeters) from the ideal breast footprint. The classification system incorporated the axis of malposition and distance to generate a treatment decision-making guide. Cases of Grade 1 malposition did not warrant surgical intervention, whereas surgical correction was warranted in all Grade 3 cases. In the combined patient cohort (n = 242 breasts, 128 patients), lateral, inferior, medial, and superior displacement ranged between Grades 1 and 3. There was no interobserver variability in the grades assigned to 9 out of 10 patients in the prospective group. CONCLUSIONS: A simple and reproducible classification system for implant malposition has been created that allows surgeons to objectively record the extent of malposition, guides surgical decision-making, and can be used to document the results of any intervention.

The influence of a previous implant-based breast reconstruction on postoperative sensation of the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap.

BACKGROUND: Implants and DIEP flaps have different outcomes regarding postoperative breast sensation. When compared to the preoperative healthy breast, implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) negatively influences postoperative breast sensation. However, it is currently unknown whether a prior IBBR also influences postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap. The goal of this cohort study is to evaluate the influence of an IBBR on the postoperative sensation of a replacing DIEP flap. METHODS: Women were included if they received a DIEP flap reconstruction after mastectomy, with or without prior tissue expander (TE) and/or definitive breast implant. Sensation was measured at four intervals in 9 areas of the breast with Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments: T0 (preoperative, implant/no reconstruction), T1 (2-7 months postoperative, DIEP), T2 (± 12 months postoperative, DIEP), Tmax (maximum follow-up, DIEP). Linear mixed-effects models were used to investigate the relationship between an implant/TE prior to the DIEP flap and recovery of breast sensation. RESULTS: 142 women comprising 206 breasts were included. 48 (23.3%) breasts did, and 158 (76.7%) breasts did not have a TE/IBBR prior to their DIEP. No statistically significant or clinically relevant relationships were found between a prior implant/TE and recovery of DIEP flap breast sensation for the flap skin, native skin, or total breast skin at T1, T2, or Tmax. There were also no relationships found after adjustment for the confounders radiation therapy, BMI, diabetes, age, flap weight, follow-up, and nerve coaptation. CONCLUSIONS: An implant/TE prior to a DIEP flap does not influence the recovery of postoperative breast sensation of the DIEP flap.

Aesthetic Potential and Safety Profile of Nanotextured Breast Implants in 1000 Cases of Breast Augmentation: Evaluation of a Single-Center Experience.

BACKGROUND: Nanotextured implants, an innovation in implant technology, are designed to enhance tissue interaction, reduce inflammation, and mitigate complications of traditional implants. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was to evaluate the aesthetic potential and safety profile of nanotextured breast implants in breast augmentation from a single-surgeon experience. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included 1000 patients who underwent breast augmentation with nanotextured implants. Aesthetic outcomes were assessed with direct measurements and BCCT.core software, focusing on breast projection, symmetry, and upper pole fullness. Patient satisfaction was measured with BREAST-Q and overall satisfaction surveys. Safety profiles were evaluated based on the incidence of complications such as infection, hematoma, capsular contracture, and implant rupture. Statistical analyses were conducted to assess the outcomes. RESULTS: The study found significant improvements in aesthetic outcomes, with 92.8% of cases achieving substantial aesthetic enhancements. Patient satisfaction was high, with 96.4% of patients reporting enhanced self-esteem and contentment. The safety profile was favorable, with a low incidence of complications (0.7% requiring revisional surgery) and no major complications reported. Long-term follow-up data indicated sustained aesthetic outcomes and a stable safety profile. CONCLUSIONS: The synergistic quality of nanotextured implants in relation to the natural breast gland tissue is defined by a significantly wider range of aesthetic options. The findings of this study underscore the positive impact of nanotextured breast implants on enhancing the aesthetic potential of breast augmentation and their contribution to a low incidence of complications.