Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 153(4): 786-793, 2024 Apr 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37220401

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral tissue expander (TE) placement for two-stage postmastectomy reconstruction is usually performed in conjunction with insertion of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). However, the effects of ADM use on TE loss or other early complications remain unknown. Therefore, the aim of this study was to compare early postoperative complications in patients who underwent prepectoral breast implant reconstruction with or without ADM use. METHODS: The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients at their institution who underwent prepectoral breast reconstruction from January of 2018 to June of 2021. The primary outcome was TE loss within 90 days of surgery; secondary outcomes included other complications such as infection, TE exposure, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and seroma. RESULTS: Data on 714 patients with 1225 TEs (1060 with ADM and 165 without) were analyzed. Baseline demographics did not differ by ADM use, although mastectomy breast tissue weight was higher in patients without ADM (750.3 g versus 540.8 g; P < 0.001). Rates of TE loss were similar in reconstructions with (3.8%) ADM and without (6.7%; P = 0.09). We also did not find differences in the rates of secondary outcomes between cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: ADM use had no statistically significant effect on early complication rates among patients undergoing breast reconstruction with prepectoral TEs. Still, this study was underpowered, and data trended toward statistical significance; thus, larger studies are required in the future. Additional research and randomized studies should focus on larger cohorts and examine long-term complications such as capsular contracture and implant malposition. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.


Asunto(s)
Dermis Acelular , Implantación de Mama , Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Mamoplastia , Humanos , Femenino , Mastectomía/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Neoplasias de la Mama/complicaciones , Estudios Retrospectivos , Mamoplastia/efectos adversos , Implantación de Mama/efectos adversos , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología
2.
Aesthet Surg J ; 43(12): 1491-1498, 2023 Nov 16.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37551639

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is frequently utilized in prepectoral breast reconstruction, but few studies have examined the role of ADM type in complication risk. OBJECTIVES: This study was performed to determine the impact of ADM type on early complication rates in 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction. METHODS: We performed a cohort examination of all patients who underwent mastectomy with immediate 2-stage alloplastic prepectoral breast reconstruction with ADM support at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center from 2018 to 2021. ADM types utilized included AlloDerm (LifeCell Corporation, Branchburg, NJ), FlexHD (MTF Biologics, Edison, NJ), and SurgiMend (Integra LifeSciences Corporation, Princeton, NJ). Complication rates based on the number of tissue expanders (TEs) were determined for each ADM type. Performance of multivariate logistic regression determined the impact of ADM type on complication risk after accounting for confounders. RESULTS: Overall, 726 patients (1054 TEs: 194 AlloDerm, 93 FlexHD, 767 SurgiMend) were included. The 3 cohorts differed in terms of mastectomy type (nipple-sparing: 23.5% of AlloDerm, 33.3% of FlexHD, 19.1% of SurgiMend, P = .038); ADM perforation (perforated: 94.8% of AlloDerm, 98.2% of FlexHD, 100% of SurgiMend, P < .001); and ADM size (AlloDerm: 153.2 cm2 [37.6], SurgiMend: 198.7 cm2 [10.4], FlexHD: 223.7 cm2 [37.9], P < .001). On univariate examination, no differences existed between ADM types for seroma, infection, exposure, malposition, or TE loss. Additionally, after adjustment for confounders with multivariate regression, no ADM type had higher odds of TE loss. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of prepectoral reconstruction patients, ADM type did not significantly affect the risk of complications. Additional prospective studies are warranted to better evaluate ADM choice for prepectoral breast reconstruction.


Asunto(s)
Dermis Acelular , Implantación de Mama , Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Colágeno , Mamoplastia , Humanos , Femenino , Mastectomía/efectos adversos , Implantación de Mama/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Estudios Retrospectivos , Mamoplastia/efectos adversos , Estudios de Cohortes , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversos
3.
Plast Reconstr Surg ; 152(1): 32-37, 2023 07 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36728202

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The association between textured implants and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is well established, but the risk of BIA-ALCL in patients with transient exposure to a textured tissue expander (TE) is not as well documented. The aim of this study was to assess the incidence and risk of BIA-ALCL in patients with temporary exposure to a textured TE with subsequent smooth implant placement. METHODS: This single-institution retrospective cohort study included all female patients who underwent two-stage breast reconstruction with placement of a textured TE from 1995 to 2016 with subsequent exchange to a smooth permanent implant. Primary outcome of interest was development of BIA-ALCL. Patients with exposure to textured implants were excluded. Follow-up was determined by last documented visit. The authors calculated summary statistics for exposure time and follow-up intervals. RESULTS: Overall, 3310 patients had temporary exposure to a textured TE with exchange to a smooth implant, totaling 5201 textured TEs. Average textured TE exposure time was 6.7 months (median, 5.8 months). Average follow-up was 6.8 years (median, 6.3 years), ranging from 3.7 months to 18 years. No cases of BIA-ALCL were identified. CONCLUSIONS: As no cases of BIA-ALCL were identified, the risk of BIA-ALCL with short exposure to textured TEs is likely lower than the risk from exposure to permanent textured implants. Although longer follow-up is needed, these results can help counsel patients with previous exposure to textured TEs who are concerned about their risk of BIA-ALCL and can contribute to discussions on potential continued utility of textured TEs. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, IV.


Asunto(s)
Implantación de Mama , Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes , Humanos , Femenino , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversos , Estudios Retrospectivos , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/epidemiología , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/etiología , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/patología , Dispositivos de Expansión Tisular/efectos adversos , Implantación de Mama/efectos adversos , Implantación de Mama/métodos , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/etiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía
4.
J Gen Intern Med ; 37(1): 212-216, 2022 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34027608

RESUMEN

Breast implant surgery for cosmetic or reconstructive purposes is becoming increasingly common. While the devices used are regulated and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, all patients with breast implants require continued follow-up. Many patients will seek this care from their primary care providers, especially when follow-up with their plastic surgeon is difficult. It is vital that treating clinicians are knowledgeable about the history of breast implants, routine screening guidelines, and the recent breast implant "hot topics"-breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), connective tissue disease, and breast implant illness. This paper will provide the necessary information for primary care providers to appropriately counsel patients with breast implants to maintain not only their trust, but also their health.


Asunto(s)
Implantación de Mama , Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes , Implantación de Mama/efectos adversos , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias de la Mama/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/diagnóstico , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/epidemiología , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/etiología
5.
JAAPA ; 34(4): 47-51, 2021 Apr 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33735141

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT: Each year, hundreds of thousands of women undergo aesthetic or reconstructive breast implant surgery. Clinicians and patients must be aware of the benefits and risks of this surgery. Recently, the FDA suggested a recall of certain textured breast implants because of a link between these implants and a rare form of lymphoma, now referred to as breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). This malignancy has an indolent course and an excellent prognosis when detected and treated early. This article reviews BIA-ALCL, addresses public safety advisories, and emphasizes protocol that all clinicians should follow when encountering a patient with textured breast implants.


Asunto(s)
Implantación de Mama , Implantes de Mama , Neoplasias de la Mama , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes , Implantación de Mama/efectos adversos , Implantes de Mama/efectos adversos , Neoplasias de la Mama/etiología , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugía , Femenino , Humanos , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/etiología , Linfoma Anaplásico de Células Grandes/terapia , Pronóstico
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...