Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 3.714
Filter
1.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38765542

ABSTRACT

Objective: The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative pain between SF flap and serratus anterior muscle (SM) in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Methods: This is a prospective cohort study that included 53 women diagnosed with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy and one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction from January 2020 to March 2021. Twenty-nine patients (54.7%) had SF elevation, and 24 patients (45.3%) underwent SM elevation. We evaluated patient-reported early postoperative pain on the first day after surgery. Also, it was reported that all surgical complications in the first month and patient reported outcomes (PROs) were measured with the BRECON 23 questionnaire. Results: The serratus fascia group used implants with larger volumes, 407.6 ± 98.9 cc (p < 0.01). There was no significant difference between the fascial and muscular groups regarding the postoperative pain score reported by the patients (2 versus 3; p = 0.30). Also, there was no difference between the groups regarding early surgical complications and PROs after breast reconstruction. Conclusion: The use of SF seems to cause less morbidity, which makes the technique an alternative to be considered in breast reconstruction. Although there was no statistical difference in postoperative pain scores between the fascia and serratus muscle groups.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Mastectomy , Pain, Postoperative , Surgical Flaps , Humans , Female , Prospective Studies , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Mammaplasty/methods , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Adult , Fascia/transplantation , Patient Reported Outcome Measures , Treatment Outcome , Breast Implantation/methods
2.
Ann Plast Surg ; 92(6): 621-624, 2024 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38717197

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT: The unique dual-lumen and baffle design of the IDEAL IMPLANT Structured Saline breast implant gives it specific advantages over both silicone gel-filled and the original saline-filled implants. This internal baffle structure also gives it an appearance on various radiologic imaging studies that may be misinterpreted as a rupture because of similarities to the well-known radiologic appearance of a ruptured silicone gel implant. Patients may present with various misinterpreted imaging studies, highlighting the need for plastic surgeons and radiologists to be familiar with the normal appearance of the intact IDEAL IMPLANT and be able to distinguish it from a ruptured IDEAL IMPLANT. The radiology findings must be correlated with the clinical findings, or an intact IDEAL IMPLANT misdiagnosed as ruptured, may cause unnecessary patient worry, and may prompt unnecessary surgery for removal or replacement.


Subject(s)
Breast Implants , Device Removal , Diagnostic Errors , Prosthesis Failure , Humans , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Female , Unnecessary Procedures , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/methods , Adult , Prosthesis Design , Silicone Gels , Saline Solution , Middle Aged
3.
Asian Pac J Cancer Prev ; 25(4): 1205-1212, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38679979

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is a common disease that affects women globally and causes physical and emotional challenges. Breast reconstructive surgery aims to restore the shape of the breast after a mastectomy. Two common approaches used today are tissue-based or autologous and implant-based reconstruction. Autologous breast reconstruction has the advantage of being more affordable, but the resulting shape is less attractive. At the same time, the implant technique produces a more pleasing shape at a more expensive cost. OBJECTIVE: To compare the level of patients' satisfaction after breast reconstruction using the implant technique with the autologous technique using the Breast-Q questionnaire. METHODS: This research was a meta-analytic study to compare patients' satisfaction levels with breast reconstruction using the autologous technique compared with the implant technique. We searched several research articles from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2014 to 2023. Then, we conducted an analysis using Revman 5.4. The results of the study were presented in a forest plot diagram. RESULTS: From the search results, there were 3980 studies. Then, exclusion and inclusion were carried out, and the results obtained were 16 research articles. Of the 16 studies, analysis was then carried out, and the results obtained were satisfaction in breast patients with a sample size of 7284. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.55 (95% CI 0.41-0.68) p < 0.00001. Satisfaction with the reconstruction results with a sample size of 2935. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.48 (95% CI 0.28-0.69) p < 0.00001. Patients' sexual satisfaction with a sample size of 7149. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.27 (95% CI 0.17-0.37) p < 0.00001. Patients' satisfaction with nipple shapes with a sample of 426. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.22 (95% CI -0.00-0.44) p = 0.06. Patients' satisfaction with plastic surgeons with a sample size of 272. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.52 (95% CI 0.25-0.80) p= 0.0002. CONCLUSION: The autologous breast reconstruction technique is better than the implant-based reconstruction technique in terms of patient satisfaction with the breast, reconstruction outcome, sexual satisfaction, nipple shapes, and plastic surgeons based on the Breast-Q questionnaire. The findings of this comprehensive study indicate that breast cancer survivors who choose autologous reconstruction have higher levels of satisfaction across multiple domains than those who decide implant-based reconstruction.


Subject(s)
Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Mastectomy , Patient Satisfaction , Humans , Female , Mammaplasty/methods , Mammaplasty/psychology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Mastectomy/psychology , Mastectomy/methods , Transplantation, Autologous , Breast Implantation/methods , Surveys and Questionnaires
4.
Ann Plast Surg ; 92(5): 514-521, 2024 May 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38685491

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) followed by total mastectomy and immediate reconstruction has become an important strategy in the treatment of breast cancer. Although the safety of subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with NACT has been extensively evaluated, the safety in prepectoral reconstruction has not been clearly elucidated. We aimed to evaluate the association of NACT with immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients who underwent total mastectomy and immediate implant-based prepectoral breast reconstruction between May and December 2021 was conducted. Patients were categorized into 2 groups: those receiving NACT and those not receiving it. Postoperative complication rates were compared between the 2 groups. The independent association between NACT and the complication profiles was evaluated. Propensity score matching was also conducted. RESULTS: We analyzed 343 cases, including 85 who received NACT treatment and 258 who did not. Compared with the non-NACT group, the NACT group was younger, had a higher body mass index, and a higher rate of adjuvant radiotherapy. There were no differences in the rates of overall complications or type of complication between the 2 groups. In the multivariable logistic analyses, NACT did not show a significant association with the development of adverse outcomes. Similar results were observed in propensity score matching analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that receiving NACT may not have a significant detrimental effect on the postoperative outcomes of immediate prepectoral prosthetic reconstructions. Conducting prepectoral implant-based reconstruction in the setting of NACT might be safe and provide acceptable outcomes.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Neoadjuvant Therapy , Postoperative Complications , Humans , Female , Retrospective Studies , Middle Aged , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Adult , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Breast Implantation/methods , Propensity Score , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Mammaplasty/methods , Treatment Outcome , Mastectomy, Simple , Breast Implants
5.
World J Surg ; 48(1): 104-109, 2024 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38686771

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Finite hospital resources has required a closer look at resource allocation. This has prompted a shift toward same day surgeries and a focus on reducing hospital readmissions. Following the institution of a same day discharge protocol for mastectomy and mastectomy with immediate reconstruction, we sought to assess differences in the length of stay and readmission rates. METHODS: This retrospective review evaluates all cases of mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction performed at a single high-volume center between June 2019 and March 2021. Average length of stay, 30-day readmission rates, Anesthesia Society Assessment class, and type of immediate reconstruction were assessed. Autologous reconstructions were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 413 patients underwent mastectomy with or without reconstruction (n = 148 pre protocol and n = 265 during protocol) between June 2019 and March 2021. Of those 413 patients, 180 underwent reconstruction (n = 62 pre protocol and n = 118 during protocol). The average length of stay after mastectomy following the implementation of the same day discharge protocol was decreased at 0.6 days (n = 265) compared to preimplementation at 1.02 days (n = 148), p < 0.001. The 30-day readmission rate was not significant between the groups, p = 0.13. A total of 180 patients underwent immediate reconstruction after mastectomy. The average length of stay after mastectomy with immediate reconstruction following implementation of the same day discharge protocol was shorter than preimplementation at 1.05 days preimplementation (n = 62) versus 0.58 days following implementation (n = 118), p < 0.001; this finding was significant for both prepectoral and subpectoral implants, p < 0.001. There was no significant difference in 30-day readmission rates between the groups with immediate reconstruction, p = 0.34. CONCLUSION: Same day discharge for mastectomy with reconstruction is as safe as the more widely recognized same day discharge practice for patients with mastectomy alone.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Length of Stay , Mastectomy , Patient Discharge , Patient Readmission , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Female , Middle Aged , Patient Discharge/statistics & numerical data , Patient Readmission/statistics & numerical data , Length of Stay/statistics & numerical data , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Adult , Mammaplasty/methods , Aged , Treatment Outcome , Ambulatory Surgical Procedures , Clinical Protocols , Breast Implantation/methods
6.
Breast Cancer ; 31(3): 456-466, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38580855

ABSTRACT

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.


Subject(s)
Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Epigastric Arteries , Mammaplasty , Perforator Flap , Sensation , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Perforator Flap/blood supply , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Epigastric Arteries/surgery , Mammaplasty/methods , Adult , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Sensation/physiology , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Aged , Postoperative Period , Breast/surgery , Breast Implantation/methods , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/instrumentation
7.
Can J Surg ; 67(2): E108-E111, 2024.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38453352

ABSTRACT

SummaryThe House of Commons Standing Committee on Health proposed in 2022 to start a national registry for breast implants. Why, and what requirements are needed, will be outlined. Breast implant products are not always in compliance with international norms and standards, and several scandals have occurred because of industry fraud. To trace which patients have defective breast implants, a good registry is an absolute must. Furthermore, some diseases, such as lymphomas, autoimmune diseases, and so-called breast implant illness, are believed to be associated with breast implants. An accurate estimation of how often these diseases occur in patients with breast implants is lacking. A registry in which not only surgical data but also patient-reported outcome measurements are recorded will result in a better understanding of patient outcomes and device performance. The registry should not be a voluntary ("opt-in") registry but a mandatory ("opt-out") registry, in which only the patient (and not the surgeon) has the choice whether to participate.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Mammaplasty , Humans , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Registries , Canada
8.
Int Wound J ; 21(3): e14822, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38468433

ABSTRACT

Incisional scarring is a factor of cosmetic appearance evaluated after breast reconstruction, along with the shape, position, and size of the breast. This study aimed to examine the effect of the incision scar location on patient satisfaction after breast reconstruction. Using the Japanese version of the SCAR-Q, we assessed the scar appearance, symptoms and psychosocial effects. Plastic surgeons performed assessments using the Manchester Scar Scale. The patients were divided into two groups: those with scars on the margins of the breast (MB group) and those with scars in the breast area (IB group). The results revealed that patients in the MB group reported significantly higher satisfaction with the scar appearance and psychological impact than those in the IB group. However, assessments using the Manchester Scar Scale did not reveal any significant differences between the two groups. In conclusion, this study underscores the importance of patient-reported outcomes in the evaluation of scar satisfaction after breast reconstruction. Patients tend to prefer and have higher satisfaction with scars along the breast margin, which offers valuable insights into surgical decisions. Further studies with larger and more diverse sample sizes are required for validation.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Surgical Wound , Humans , Female , Cicatrix/etiology , Cicatrix/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Implantation/methods , Breast , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Mammaplasty/methods , Surgical Wound/surgery
9.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(5)2024 Mar 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38474119

ABSTRACT

There is extensive coverage in the existing literature on implant-associated lymphomas like anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, but breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) has received limited scholarly attention since its first case in 1992. Thus, this study aims to conduct a qualitative synthesis focused on the underexplored association between breast implants and BIA-SCC. A systematic review was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all currently reported cases of BIA-SCC. Additionally, a literature review was performed to identify potential biochemical mechanisms that could lead to BIA-SCC. Studies were vetted for quality using the NIH quality assessment tool. From an initial pool of 246 papers, 11 met the quality criteria for inclusion, examining a total of 14 patients aged between 40 and 81 years. BIA-SCC was found in a diverse range of implants, including those with smooth and textured surfaces, as well as those filled with saline and silicone. The condition notably manifested a proclivity for aggressive clinical progression, as evidenced by a mortality rate approximating 21.4% within a post-diagnostic interval of six months. Our literature review reveals that chronic inflammation, driven by various external factors such as pathogens and implants, can initiate carcinogenesis through epigenetic modifications and immune system alterations. This includes effects from exosomes and macrophage polarization, showcasing potential pathways for the pathogenesis of BIA-SCC. The study highlights the pressing need for further investigation into BIA-SCC, a subject hitherto inadequately addressed in the academic sphere. This necessitates the urgency for early screening and intervention to improve postoperative outcomes. While the review is confined by its reliance on case reports and series, it serves as a valuable reference for future research endeavors.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic , Mammaplasty , Humans , Adult , Middle Aged , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/pathology
10.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 60(3)2024 Mar 03.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38541157

ABSTRACT

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most frequently performed procedure for breast reconstruction following mastectomy, which involves the surgical placement of breast implants. The approach to breast reconstruction can be divided into two main categories, namely prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) and subpectoral breast reconstruction (SPBR), based on the implant plan and placement technique. In recent years, there has been a significant surge in the popularity of prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction, where the implants are positioned above the chest muscle, as opposed to beneath it in the subpectoral approach. However, despite this growing preference, there is a lack of comprehensive data regarding the national trends in the utilization of this technique, thus necessitating further investigation. This narrative review aims to ascertain the current global patterns linked to prepectoral breast reconstruction and elucidate the considerations surrounding patient and implant selection, reconstructive techniques, the utilization of meshes in prepectoral reconstruction, the ensuing outcomes and complications, the ramifications of radiotherapy, and the potential advantages of integrating fat infiltration into the implementation of this technique in breast reconstruction with a focus on published papers in last five years. Conclusion: Prepectoral breast reconstruction has emerged as an appropriate surgical option for individuals seeking breast reconstruction. This development can be attributed to the recent progress made in implant technology, which has significantly enhanced the outcomes of this procedure. Additionally, advancements in mastectomy techniques, autologous fat grafting, and the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have also played a vital role in improving the aesthetic results of prepectoral breast reconstruction. As a result, the significance and effectiveness of this technique in the field of breast reconstruction have been firmly established, making it an essential component of the overall armamentarium available to plastic surgeons for breast reconstruction purposes.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Mastectomy/methods , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Pectoralis Muscles/surgery , Mammaplasty/methods , Breast Implantation/methods , Retrospective Studies
11.
Int J Mol Sci ; 25(6)2024 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38542490

ABSTRACT

Breast Implant-Associated-Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a rare T-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma associated with breast prosthetic implants and represents a diagnostic challenge. The National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines, updated in 2024, recommend for diagnosis an integrated work-up that should include cell morphology, CD30 immunohistochemistry (IHC), and flow cytometry (FCM). CD30 IHC, although the test of choice for BIA-ALCL diagnosis, is not pathognomonic, and this supports the recommendation to apply a multidisciplinary approach. A close collaboration between pathologists and laboratory professionals allowed the diagnosis of three BIA-ALCLs, presented as case reports, within a series of 35 patients subjected to periprosthetic effusions aspiration from 2018 to 2023. In one case, rare neoplastic cells were identified by FCM, and this result was essential in leading the anatomopathological picture as indicative of this neoplasm. In fact, the distinction between a lymphomatous infiltrate from reactive cells may be very complex in the cytopathology and IHC setting when neoplastic cells are rare. On the other hand, one limitation of FCM analysis is the need for fresh samples. In this study, we provide evidence that a dedicated fixative allows the maintenance of an unaltered CD30 expression on the cell surface for up to 72 h.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic , Humans , Female , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/diagnosis , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/etiology , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/pathology , Flow Cytometry , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Exudates and Transudates/metabolism , Breast Neoplasms/complications
12.
Ann Plast Surg ; 92(4): 379-382, 2024 Apr 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38527341

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Radiation therapy can adversely affect outcomes of implant-based breast reconstruction, potentially complicating procedures like nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), which is increasingly popular in breast cancer management. This study aims to evaluate the impact of radiation on nipple symmetry in patients undergoing bilateral NSM with implant-based reconstruction. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis using data from an Emory University review board-approved database. This encompassed bilateral NSMs coupled with immediate implant-based reconstructions. The BCCT.core software was employed to objectively measure nipple asymmetry preoperatively and postoperatively. Metrics, such as Breast Retraction Assessment values, upper nipple retraction, lower breast contour, and nipple to midline (NML) discrepancies were quantified. The study included 80 patients with a minimum of 1 year of follow-up; among them, 15 received radiation therapy (RT) while 65 did not. RESULTS: The reconstructions were divided into tissue expander, used in 39 cases (48.8%), and direct-to-implant (DTI), employed in 41 cases (51.2%). The DTIs were further categorized based on the location of the implant: 22 subpectoral and 19 prepectoral. Radiation was applied to 15 breasts, distributed among prepectoral DTI (4), subpectoral DTI (6), and tissue expander (5). Breast Retraction Assessment scores significantly differed between the nonirradiated and irradiated groups (1.49 vs 2.64, P < 0.0004). Nipple to midline differences and Upper Nipple Retraction also significantly varied postradiation, especially when comparing subpectoral and prepectoral implant placements. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation therapy has a detrimental effect on nipple symmetry after bilateral NSM and implant-based reconstruction, with variations seen regardless of the implant's placement or the reconstructive technique utilized. Specifically, subpectoral reconstructions irradiated were prone to lateral nipple displacement, likely related to radiation-induced pectoralis muscle changes, while prepectoral irradiated reconstructions tended to have increased vertical displacement. These insights are crucial for patient education and surgical planning in the context of radiation and breast reconstruction.


Subject(s)
Breast Diseases , Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Nipples/surgery , Breast Implantation/methods , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Mastectomy/methods , Retrospective Studies , Follow-Up Studies , Mammaplasty/methods , Breast Diseases/surgery
13.
Aesthet Surg J ; 44(6): NP391-NP401, 2024 May 15.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38429010

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Capsular contracture is traditionally evaluated with the Baker classification, but this has notable limitations regarding reproducibility and objectivity. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop and validate procedure-specific histopathological scoring systems to assess capsular contracture severity. METHODS: Biopsies of breast implant capsules were used to develop histopathological scoring systems for patients following breast augmentation and breast reconstruction. Ten histological parameters were evaluated by multivariable logistic regression to identify those most associated with capsular contracture. Significant parameters (P < .05) were selected for the scoring systems and assigned weighted scores (1-10). Validation was assessed from the area under the curve (AUC) and the mean absolute error (MAE). RESULTS: A total of 720 biopsies from 542 patients were included. Four parameters were selected for the augmentation scoring system, namely, collagen layer thickness, fiber organization, inflammatory infiltration, and calcification, providing a combined maximum score of 26. The AUC and MAE for the augmentation scoring system were 81% and 0.8%, which is considered strong. Three parameters were selected for the reconstruction scoring system, namely, fiber organization, collagen layer cellularity, and inflammatory infiltration, providing a combined maximum score of 19. The AUC and MAE of the reconstruction scoring system were 72% and 7.1%, which is considered good. CONCLUSIONS: The new histopathological scoring systems provide an objective, reproducible, and accurate assessment of capsular contracture severity. We propose these novel scoring systems as a valuable tool for confirming capsular contracture diagnosis in the clinical setting, for research, and for implant manufacturers and insurance providers in need of a confirmed capsular contracture diagnosis.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Implant Capsular Contracture , Severity of Illness Index , Humans , Female , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Implant Capsular Contracture/diagnosis , Implant Capsular Contracture/pathology , Implant Capsular Contracture/etiology , Middle Aged , Adult , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/instrumentation , Reproducibility of Results , Biopsy , Young Adult , Aged , Collagen , Breast/pathology , Breast/surgery , Retrospective Studies
14.
Am J Surg Pathol ; 48(6): e43-e64, 2024 Jun 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38451836

ABSTRACT

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma has been recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization classification of hematolymphoid neoplasms. These neoplasms are causally related to textured implants that were used worldwide until recently. Consequently, there is an increased demand for processing periprosthetic capsules, adding new challenges for surgeons, clinicians, and pathologists. In the literature, the focus has been on breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma; however, benign complications related to the placement of breast implants occur in up to 20% to 30% of patients. Imaging studies are helpful in assessing patients with breast implants for evidence of implant rupture, changes in tissues surrounding the implants, or regional lymphadenopathy related to breast implants, but pathologic examination is often required. In this review, we couple our experience with a review of the literature to describe a range of benign lesions associated with breast implants that can be associated with different clinical presentations or pathogenesis and that may require different diagnostic approaches. We illustrate the spectrum of the most common of these benign disorders, highlighting their clinical, imaging, gross, and microscopic features. Finally, we propose a systematic approach for the diagnosis and handling of breast implant specimens in general.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic , Humans , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Female , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/pathology , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/etiology , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/instrumentation , Predictive Value of Tests , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Clinical Relevance
16.
World J Surg ; 48(5): 1167-1176, 2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38497975

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a common comorbid condition that can be associated with postoperative mortality and morbidity. However, the outcome profile of patients with COPD after breast reconstruction has yet to be established. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the postoperative outcomes in patients with COPD who underwent autologous (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: National Inpatient Sample was used to identify patients who underwent ABR or IBR from Q4 2015 to 2020. Multivariable logistic regressions were used to compare inhospital outcomes between COPD and non-COPD patients while adjusting for demographics, primary payer status, hospital characteristics, and comorbidities. RESULTS: There were 1288 (9.92%) COPD and 11,696 non-COPD patients who underwent ABR. Meanwhile, 1742 (9.70%) COPD and 16,221 non-COPD patients underwent IBR. In both ABR and IBR, patients with COPD had higher rates of seroma (ABR, aOR = 1.863, 95% CI = 1.022-3.397, and p = 0.04; IBR, aOR = 1.524, 95% CI = 1.014-2.291, and p = 0.04), infection (ABR, aOR = 1.863, 95% CI = 1.022-3.397, and p = 0.04; IBR, aOR = 1.956, 95% CI = 1.205-3.176, and p = 0.01), and prolonged LOS (p < 0.01). Specifically, patients with COPD in ABR had higher risks of respiratory complications (aOR = 1.991, 95% CI = 1.291-3.071, and p < 0.01) and incurred higher total hospital charges (p < 0.01). Meanwhile, patients with COPD undergoing IBR had elevated risks of renal complications (aOR = 3.421, 95% CI = 2.108-5.55, and p < 0.01), deep wound complications (aOR = 3.191, 95% CI = 1.423-7.153, and p < 0.01), and a higher rate of transfers out (aOR = 1.815, 95% CI = 1.081-3.05, and p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: COPD is an independent risk factor associated with distinct adverse outcomes in ABR and IBR. These findings can be valuable for preoperative risk stratification, determining surgical candidacy, and planning postoperative management in patients with COPD.


Subject(s)
Mammaplasty , Postoperative Complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive , Humans , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/surgery , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/complications , Pulmonary Disease, Chronic Obstructive/epidemiology , Female , Middle Aged , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Mammaplasty/methods , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Implantation/methods , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome
17.
Life Sci Alliance ; 7(5)2024 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38383454

ABSTRACT

Breast implants are extensively employed for both reconstructive and esthetic purposes. However, the safety of breast implants with textured surfaces has been questioned, owing to a potential correlation with anaplastic large-cell lymphoma and the recurrence of breast cancer. This study investigates the immune response elicited by different prosthetic surfaces, focusing on the comparison between macrotextured and microtextured breast implants. Through the analysis of intraoperatively harvested periprosthetic fluids and cell culture experiments on surface replicas, we demonstrate that macrotextured surfaces elicit a more pronounced chronic-like activation of leucocytes and an increased release of inflammatory cytokines, in contrast to microtextured surfaces. In addition, in vitro fluorescent imaging of leucocytes revealed an accumulation of lymphocytes within the cavities of the macrotextured surfaces, indicating that the physical entrapment of these cells may contribute to their activation. These findings suggest that the topography of implant surfaces plays a significant role in promoting a chronic-like inflammatory environment, which could be a contributing factor in the development of lymphomas associated with a wide range of implantable devices.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic , Humans , Female , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/etiology , Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic/surgery
19.
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg ; 90: 76-87, 2024 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38364672

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Implant-based breast augmentations and reconstructions are one of the most common surgical procedures performed by plastic surgeons in the United States, which has rapidly increased in popularity since the 2000s. Silicone lymphadenopathy (SL) is a complication of breast implants that involves migration of silicone to nearby soft tissue/lymph nodes. Data on its clinical features and management is scarce. METHODS: SL-related search terms were used to find articles in 3 databases. Of 598 articles, 101 studies met the inclusion criteria. Demographics, clinical presentation, workup, and management data were analyzed. RESULTS: Of 279 cases of SL and 107 with information on initial diagnosis, 35 (33%) were incidental. The most common symptom was painless lymphadenopathy, followed by painful lymphadenopathy. 251 (95%) and 13 (5%) patients had silicone and saline implants, respectively. 149 (68%) patients had implant rupture. Axillary lymphadenopathy was the most affected region (136 cases, 72%), followed by internal mammary (40 cases, 21%), cervical/supraclavicular (36 cases, 19%), and mediastinal (24 cases, 13%) regions. 25% of patients underwent fine-needle aspiration, 12% core needle biopsy, and 59% excisional biopsy. 32% of cases underwent explantation and/or implant exchange. The most common indication for surgery was implant rupture. Histology showed multinucleated giant cells, large histiocytes, and silicone accumulation. CONCLUSIONS: SL is a complication associated with breast implants. The majority of patients are asymptomatic, and most cases are managed conservatively. Minority need a biopsy and surgical interventions due to abnormal imaging, persistent symptoms, and/or implant rupture. Workup and management should be tailored to the patient.


Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Lymphadenopathy , Humans , Silicone Gels/adverse effects , Prevalence , Lymphadenopathy/etiology , Lymphadenopathy/therapy , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Breast Implantation/methods
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...