Social Media as a Tool to Educate Plastic Surgeons on Patients' Concerns Before and After Cosmetic Breast Surgeries.

BACKGROUND: The rapid evolution of the social media platform has had a major effect on the field of medicine. OBJECTIVE: To identify patterns, trends and patients' concerns before and after aesthetic surgeries involving breast implants, by analyzing social media posts. METHODS: We examined comments posted on popular Israeli online public forums between January 2019 and May 2021, regarding: breast augmentation, mastopexy-augmentation and breast implant removal. RESULTS: During the study period, 561 comments were posted on the three forums investigated: 165 pre-operative and 396 post-operative. In the pre-operative period, the main interests were implant size, type and location, as discussed in 69 posts (42%). During the first two months post-operative, questions reflected concerns regarding post-operative instructions, wound management and asymmetry: 76 (43%), 59 (34%) and 27 (16%), respectively. These topics continued to be in focus up to one year post-operative. Beyond the first post-operative year, patients' main interests were breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (25 posts, 28%), capsule formation (23 posts, 26%) and systemic effects (23 posts, 26%). CONCLUSIONS: Social media harnessing to identify patterns, trends and patient concerns pre- and post-aesthetic breast surgeries is a novel approach. Misinformation was common, particularly in comments posted more than one year post-operative. Four topics that especially concerned patients in the immediate and late post-operative period were asymmetric results, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, capsule removal and systemic effects. We advise surgeon and plastic surgeon societies to issue position papers on controversial subjects, to counter the dissemination of potentially misleading information. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors   www.springer.com/00266.

Comparative study of patient outcomes between direct to implant and two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction plays a central role in the outcome management of patients with breast cancer, particularly in terms of quality of life (QoL), which must be weighed carefully when considering the available surgical options. In the context of implant-based breast reconstruction, immediate replacement with prosthesis (direct-to-implant (DTI)) and acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is gaining popularity, at the expense of the traditional two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with tissue expander (TE), and the literature suggests that patients tend to prefer interventions with "immediate" therapeutic efficacy and aesthetic satisfaction that obviate the need for further invasive surgery. We investigated this hypothesis by administering the BREAST-Q™ questionnaire to two groups of patients who had undergone the respective procedures. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional observational study of 192 consecutive mastectomy patients who received implant-based reconstruction, comparing health-related quality of life (HR-QoL), patient-related outcomes (PROs) and satisfaction in patients who had undergone immediate dual plane DTI with ADM (96) versus the two-stage submuscular approach (96). We also counted the number of surgeries required in each group to achieve a definitive outcome. FINDINGS: Our study revealed no major differences in terms of QoL scores, with the two approaches being largely comparable. However, single-stage reconstruction seems to offer the additional advantages of better satisfaction with the care received, sparing the patient temporary body image dissatisfaction and reducing the number of surgeries required, thereby lessening the burden on the patient, the healthcare system and society as a whole.

Adjunctive Procedures and Informed Consent with Breast Implant Explantation.

BACKGROUND: The use of injectable or implantable materials or devices in the breast for augmentation or reconstruction has a history of innovation and controversy. Staying current in the field of breast implant management today means understanding not just the published literature but also its absence. Cutting edge breast implant treatment also means awareness of patient and media-driven interests and requests. METHODS: Adjuvant treatments to optimize physical and psychological well-being with breast implant explantation, without replacement, will be addressed through literature review and analysis. RESULTS: The body of literature demonstrates evidence of variable, and sometimes contradictory, methods to address adjunctive management of systemic concerns, the capsule, soft tissue of the native breast/chest, and treatment timing related to explantation. Few approaches are supported by very strong evidence. Many treatment methodologies are defensible. Any current attempts at optimizing management in patients undergoing explantation will be somewhat impaired by the ongoing nebulousness of related issues, such as breast implant illness. It seems clear, therefore, that plastic surgeons must fulfill their duty as caregivers to provide explantation surgery, either to attempt to improve physical health, mental well-being, or simply to respect patients' wishes. A well-informed surgeon will likely employ a variety of approaches, adapted to the unique patient presentations at hand. CONCLUSION: It is expected that consultations, incisions, tissue rearrangements, surgical timing, and treatment indications will continue to vary as scientific investigation strives to understand and to optimize treatment of patients experiencing difficulty with breast implants.

Predictors of women's sexual outcomes after implant-based breast reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: Although breast reconstruction has become an important treatment modality following mastectomy, few studies assessed predictors of postoperative sexual outcomes after breast reconstruction. Therefore, we aimed to study three sexual outcomes following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR), and associate multiple biopsychosocial factors with these outcomes. METHODS: Data collection was part of a multicenter prospective study on IBBR. A predictive model was tested including medical, background and psychological predictors, partner relationship factors and physical sexual function. Data collection included clinical and questionnaire data (preoperatively and 1 year following reconstruction) using the BREAST-Q Sexual well-being scale (BQ5), and questions regarding sexual dysfunction and sexual satisfaction questions (Female Sexual Function Index). RESULTS: The study sample consisted of 88 women who underwent mastectomy and IBBR. Mean postoperative BQ5 scores were lower than before surgery (M = 58 [SD = 18] vs 65 [SD = 20]; P = .01, Wilks' Lamdba = .88). Sexual dysfunctions were related strongest to orgasm inability and vaginal lubrication issues. The tested models predicted 37%-46% of the sexual outcomes: sexual outcomes were mostly predicted by psychosocial well-being, physical sexual function and partner support. Preoperative sexual and psychosocial well-being were positively associated with postoperative sexual well-being (r = 0.45 and r = 0.47). CONCLUSIONS: Although moderately positive sexual outcomes were reported after IBBR, some women reported issues with vaginal lubrication, breast sensation and orgasm. Sexual dysfunctions were predicted by vaginal lubrication and medical treatments, while sexual well-being and satisfaction were more predicted by psychosocial well-being and partner support. We advocate supportive care that includes partners and psychosocial functioning to optimize sexual outcomes after IBBR.

Frequency, Determinants, and Satisfaction of Breast Augmentation in Trans Women Receiving Hormone Treatment.

INTRODUCTION: As breast development in trans women (male sex assigned at birth, female gender identity) who receive gender-affirming hormone treatment is often moderate, they may choose breast augmentation as part of their treatment. AIM: The aim of the study was to investigate the frequency, determinants, and satisfaction of breast augmentation among trans women receiving hormone treatment. METHODS: Trans women who started hormone treatment between 1972 and 2018 at our center received an anonymous questionnaire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The questionnaire contained questions about the start date of hormone treatment, the current age of the respondent, whether or not she underwent breast augmentation, what her considerations in this decision were, and, if the respondent did have breast implants, whether she was satisfied with the result and/or experienced health complaints she attributed to her breast implants. RESULTS: A total of 3,073 questionnaires were distributed, of which 773 were retrieved back (median age of the respondents: 50 years, interquartile range: 35-59). Age and year of start of hormone treatment was comparable between responders and nonresponders. The frequency of breast augmentation varied from 70% in trans women who started hormone treatment between 1980 and 2000 to 20% in those who started between 2010 and 2015. Trans women underwent breast augmentation median 2 years after the start of hormone treatment (interquartile range: 2-4), and 80% was satisfied with the result. Approximately one-third experienced health complaints they attributed to their breast implants. People who considered breast augmentation reported financial limitations as an important reason not to undergo breast augmentation. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: This study shows that it is important to discuss pros and cons of breast augmentation to support trans women in making a well-informed decision. STRENGTHS & LIMITATIONS: This is the largest study performed on the frequency and satisfaction of breast augmentation among trans women, which also includes health complaints and considerations in the decision whether or not to undergo breast augmentation. One of the limitations was that we were unable to link other clinical data. CONCLUSION: 4 of 5 trans women either chose or considered breast augmentation as part of their gender-affirming treatment. Most of the trans women who underwent breast augmentation were satisfied with the result, although approximately one-third experienced health complaints they attributed to their breast implants. Reasons not to undergo breast augmentation included financial limitations. This study shows that it is important to discuss with trans women the positive effects and possible side-effects of breast augmentation to help them make a well-informed decision whether or not to undergo breast augmentation. de Blok CJM, Staphorsius AS, Wiepjes CM, et al. Frequency, Determinants, and Satisfaction of Breast Augmentation in Trans Women Receiving Hormone Treatment. J Sex Med 2020;17:342-348.

Patient-Reported Satisfaction and Quality of Life in Obese Patients: A Comparison between Microsurgical and Prosthetic Implant Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing autologous breast reconstruction have higher rates of patient-reported satisfaction compared to patients undergoing prosthetic reconstruction. Obesity has been shown to increase postoperative complications in both microsurgical and implant reconstructions. The authors evaluated the effects of microsurgical breast reconstruction and prosthetic breast reconstruction on patient-reported outcomes and quality of life in obese patients. METHODS: A retrospective review of obese patients who underwent breast reconstruction from January of 2009 to December of 2017 was conducted. Patients were divided into two cohorts: microsurgical and two-stage tissue expander/implant-based reconstruction. BREAST-Q survey response, demographic information, complications, and need for revision procedures were analyzed. RESULTS: One hundred fifty-five patients met the inclusion criteria: 75 (48.4 percent) underwent microsurgical breast reconstruction and 80 (51.6 percent) underwent implant-based reconstruction. Cohorts were similar in body mass index, mean mastectomy specimen weight, laterality, indication for surgery, smoking status, and postoperative complications. Microsurgical reconstruction patients were younger (49.0 years versus 53.0 years; p = 0.02) and more likely to have delayed reconstruction [n = 70 (64.2 percent) versus n = 0 (0.0 percent); p = 0.0001]. BREAST-Q responses showed that microsurgery patients were more satisfied with their breasts (Q-Score of 63.4 ± 6.9 versus 50.8 ± 12.8; p = 0.0001), overall outcome (Q-Score 70.5 ± 13.0 versus 60.3 ± 10.8; p = 0.0001), and chest physical well-being (Q-Score of 69.1 ± 10.9 versus 63.8 ± 8.2; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Microsurgical breast reconstruction in obese patients yields higher satisfaction with breasts, overall outcomes, and chest physical well-being than implant-based reconstruction. Despite increased postoperative complications associated with obesity, microsurgical breast reconstruction appears to be a good choice for women who understand its risks and benefits and choose to proceed with it.

Systematic Review of the Impact of Acellular Dermal Matrix on Aesthetics and Patient Satisfaction in Tissue Expander-to-Implant Breast Reconstructions.

BACKGROUND: Acellular dermal matrix is used in most postmastectomy implant-based breast reconstructions in the United States. It is believed to be safe, despite a slightly increased complication rate. Although never established in a unifying study, the primary advantage of acellular dermal matrix is believed to be an enhanced aesthetic result, thus justifying the added expense. The purpose of this study was to assess the aesthetic benefits of acellular dermal matrix in expander-to-implant breast reconstruction. METHODS: A systematic review adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses methodology was performed including all original studies examining aesthetic outcomes of expander-to-implant breast reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix compared to muscular coverage. Direct-to-implant and prepectoral studies were excluded from the evaluation. The results were aggregated and reported as a summary. RESULTS: Among 883 studies identified, 49 full-text articles were reviewed and nine articles ultimately met inclusion criteria. All nine studies were not randomized. Of these, three articles (1448 total patients) evaluated reconstruction aesthetic outcomes by patient satisfaction, whereas six articles evaluated the aesthetic outcomes by external observer (504 total patients). None of the articles evaluating patient satisfaction reported a difference between acellular dermal matrix and muscular reconstruction. Five of the six articles using objective outcomes demonstrated significant improvement in aesthetic outcome in the acellular dermal matrix group. CONCLUSIONS: Although little evidence exists evaluating the aesthetic benefits of acellular dermal matrix for expander-to-implant breast reconstruction, the data suggest that objective observers consider acellular dermal matrix-assisted expander-to-implant breast reconstructions aesthetically superior to reconstruction with only muscular coverage, but patients appear to be equally satisfied with both reconstructive options.

Latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction with or without implants: A comparison between outcome and patient satisfaction.

BACKGROUND: The latissimus dorsi (LD) flap is largely used in breast reconstruction. The aim of this study is to evaluate and compare the advantage of the LD flap in association with an implant to that of LD flap in association with lipofilling to add additional volume following breast reconstruction by assessing the number of revision procedures, length of hospitalization, complication rate, and patient satisfaction. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed to evaluate complication rate, number and type of revision procedures required, hospitalization time, and overall duration of the reconstructive process in patients undergoing LD breast reconstruction in our department between January 2012 and March 2015. Patient satisfaction was assessed using BREAST-Q®. RESULTS: Ninety-five breast reconstructions performed on 90 patients were included. In 38 patients, 42 breasts were reconstructed using LD flap in association with lipofilling (Group 1). In the remaining 52 patients, 53 breast reconstructions were performed using LD flap in association with an implant (Group 2). Findings concerning total hospitalization time, overall duration of the reconstructive process, and the distribution of supplementary surgical procedures demonstrated no statistically significant differences between the two groups. However, the surgical complication rate was higher in Group 2 than in Group 1 (14.2% vs. 18.8%, respectively). Regarding BREAST-Q, a detailed analysis of the "satisfaction with breasts" domain showed a higher score for Group 1 than for Group 2. CONCLUSIONS: The association of a breast implant with LD reconstruction does not decrease breast reconstruction time in terms of the number of revision procedures and hospitalization time, exposes patients to a higher complication rate, and does not improve patient satisfaction.

Thoracodorsal artery perforator flap as an autologous alternative to acellular dermal matrix.

BACKGROUND: Thoracodorsal artery perforator (TDAP) flap is one of the relatively new techniques in breast reconstruction. This pedicled flap retains the benefits of perforator flaps as regards minimal donor site morbidity without the need for microvascular anastomosis. Its role in partial breast reconstruction has been well documented. However, there are few reports about the role of this flap in total breast reconstruction. METHODS: This study included 47 cases who presented to the breast unit of the National Cancer Institute of Cairo University from 2013 to 2015. All patients underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction. The TDAP flap was used to complete the subpectoral pocket for the implants in a way similar to the acellular dermal matrix. RESULTS: Overall complication rate was 14.9%. Capsular contracture occurred in 6.4%.There were no donor site complications. The majority of patients were satisfied with their cosmetic results. Sixty-eight percent rated their result as "excellent" or "good." CONCLUSION: Thoracodorsal artery perforator flap can play a significant role in total breast reconstruction. In settings with limited resources, this flap can serve as an available autologous alternative to acellular dermal matrix.

The Impact of Animation Deformity on Quality of Life in Post-Mastectomy Reconstruction Patients.

Background: Animation deformity after subpectoral breast implant placement has been documented; however, the actual prevalence and effect on patient quality of life has not been studied much. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to show that all patients with subpectoral implants experience some degree of animation deformity and that it can affect their quality of life, including causing embarrassment and discomfort in reconstructed patients. Methods: Patients who underwent breast implant surgery were contacted for inclusion in the study. Patients were obtained from a single surgeon's practice but included patients operated on outside the practice, and those seen in the practice for a consultation. A six-item questionnaire was developed by the senior author (H.B.) and the medical student (N.F.) involved in the study, to assess quality of life related to animation deformity. Patients had their degree of animation deformity assessed by the senior author and a medical student. Results: Of 25 patients who agreed to the questionnaire and assessment, 20% had grade I distortion, 44% grade II, 24% grade III, and 12% grade IV. Of the patients questioned, 80% were bothered by an animation deformity and 45% of those patients were bothered to a significant degree (≥6 out of 10). In addition, 48% of patients felt that the animation deformity interfered with their daily life, and 28% (7/25) of patients underwent, or were scheduled to undergo, revision of their reconstruction at the time of interview. The degree of the clinically observed animation deformity was correlated with patient dissatisfaction, with an R value of 0.47 (P value = 0.0145). Conclusions: All patients with subpectoral implant positioning will experience some degree of animation deformity. Especially in the reconstructed breast population, animation deformity, and its severity, affects patients' quality of life. Other approaches to reconstruction should be considered to prevent animation deformity in this population. Level of Evidence: 4.

Patient-reported outcomes measured by BREAST-Q after implant-based breast reconstruction: A cross-sectional controlled study in Brazilian patients.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess patient-reported outcomes of breast reconstruction with implants, using the BREAST-Q, in the late postoperative period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 114 women previously operated due to breast cancer, in the late postoperative period (range 6-24 months) were enrolled in this cross-sectional study, and were allocated to either the mastectomy group (MG, n = 57) or reconstruction group (RG, n = 57). Patients in MG and RG, respectively, completed the Brazilian versions of Mastectomy and Reconstruction Modules of the BREAST-Q. RESULTS: The mean age of patients was 46.6 and 44.3 years in MG and RG, respectively. All patients underwent chemotherapy and 6% and 11% of patients underwent radiotherapy in MG and RG, respectively. Patients in the RG reported higher satisfaction with surgical outcome (P < 0.0001). However, no significant between-group differences were found in physical and sexual well-being, or satisfaction with the plastic surgeon, medical team, and office staff. CONCLUSION: Breast reconstruction with implants increased patient satisfaction with the surgical outcome, but did not influence patients' physical and sexual well-being or their satisfaction with the treatment received.

Qualitatively understanding patients' and health professionals' experiences of the BRECONDA breast reconstruction decision aid.

OBJECTIVE: Women diagnosed with breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ and those with a genetic susceptibility to developing this disease face the challenging decision of whether or not to undergo breast reconstruction following mastectomy. As part of a large randomized controlled trial, this qualitative study examined women's experiences of using the Breast RECONstruction Decision Aid (BRECONDA) and health professionals' feedback regarding the impact of this resource on patients' knowledge and decision making about breast reconstruction. METHOD: Semistructured interviews were conducted with women who accessed the BRECONDA intervention (N = 36) and with their healthcare providers (N = 6). All interviews were transcribed verbatim and subjected to thematic analysis by 3 independent coders. RESULTS: Participants reported an overall positive impression, with all interviewees endorsing this decision aid as a useful resource for women considering reconstructive surgery. Thematic analysis of patient interviews revealed 4 themes: overall impressions and aesthetics; personal relevance and utility; introducing BRECONDA; and advantages and suggested improvements. Analysis of health professionals' interviews also revealed 4 themes: need for BRECONDA, impact of BRECONDA, potential difficulties that may arise in using the decision aid, and recommending BRECONDA to patients. Patients indicated that they derived benefit from this resource at all stages of their decision-making process, with the greatest perceived benefit being for those early in their breast reconstruction journey. CONCLUSION: These findings support the use of BRECONDA as an adjunct to clinical consultation and other information sources.

Predictors of satisfaction in patient with silicone breast implants and its association with drug intake habits.

BACKGROUND: Satisfaction is an important outcome variable in surgical success. The purpose of this study is to evaluate predictors of satisfaction in women submitted to silicone textured breast implant surgery. METHODS: A retrospective evaluation of women receiving textured silicone breast implants was performed. Patients were divided in four groups: cosmetic cohort (n = 104), reconstructive cohort (n = 120), general population control cohort (n = 120) and aesthetic control cohort (n = 54). Data were collected based on information retrieved from patient records, a planned consultation and a self-administered structured questionnaire. RESULTS: Patient satisfaction was influenced by preoperative information (p = .007), cohort (p < .001), and occurrence of postoperative complications (p < .001). The degree of satisfaction was also related with drug intake habits: women using psychotropic drugs were 3-fold more likely to report poor satisfaction than those that never used these drugs (p < .001). CONCLUSION: The purpose of the surgery, preoperative information and the occurrence of postoperative complications have an impact on the degree of satisfaction of women submitted to silicone breast implant surgery. Women using psychotropic drugs are more likely to report poor satisfaction.

Cambios en la calidad de vida en mujeres sometidas a aumento mamario: resultados preliminares de un estudio de cohortes / Changes in quality of life in women subjected to augmentation mammoplasty: preliminary results of a cohort study

Objetivo Determinar los cambios en calidad de vida en mujeres sometidas a mamoplastia de aumento o mastopexia con prótesis, usando el instrumento validado Breast-Q®. Materiales y métodos Estudio de cohortes prospectivo. Se incluyeron todas las pacientes operadas de mamoplastia de aumento o mastopexia de aumento en el Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile entre octubre de 2013 y mayo de 2014. La calidad de vida (CdV) se midió con el instrumento validado Breast-Q®. Se realizó estadística descriptiva y analítica para evaluar el cambio global en CdV y por dominios considerando estadísticamente significativo un valor p < 0,05. Resultados En el periodo estudiado se operaron 58 pacientes, 33 (56,9%) completaron el instrumento Breast-Q® en el preoperatorio y 25 (75,7%) de ellas en el postoperatorio. La CdV subió de un 49,7% a un 82,5% (p < 0,001); analizando por dominio hubo mejoría en autoestima (52% a 88%, p < 0,001), autoimagen (22% a 80%, p < 0,001) y vida sexual (31% a 86%, p < 0,001). Los síntomas físicos empeoraron desde un 94% a 75% (p < 0,001). Conclusiones El aumento mamario mejora la CdV, específicamente la autoestima, la autoimagen y la vida sexual, pero las molestias físicas aumentan. La satisfacción global fue alta.

Objective To determine the changes in the quality of life of women subjected to augmentation mammoplasty or a prosthesis mastopexy, using the validated tool Breast-Q®. Materials and methods A prospective cohorts study was conducted that included operated on for augmentation mammoplasty or augmentation mastopexy in the Hospital Clínico de la Universidad de Chile (HCUCH) between October 2013 and May 2014. The quality of life (QoL) was measured using the Breast-Q® validated tool. Descriptive and analytic statistics were performed to evaluate the overall change in QoL and by domains, considering a p<.05 as statistically significant. Results A total of 58 patients were operated on, of whom 33 (56.9%) completed the Breast-Q® questionnaire before surgery, and 25 (75.7%) of them in the post-operative period. The quality of life increased from 49.7% to 82.5% (p<.001). When analysed by domain, there was an improvement in Self-esteem (52% to 88%, p<.001), Self-image (22% to 80%, p<.001) and Sex Life (31% to 86%, p<.001). The physical symptoms increased from 75% to 94% (p<.001). Conclusions Breast augmentation improves the quality of life, in particular, self-esteem, self-image, and sex life, but physical discomforts increased. The overall satisfaction was high.

Explicating perceived barriers to mammography for the USCREEN project: concerns about breast implants, faith violations, and perceived recommendations.

In line with the health belief model, perceived barriers have proven to be a key determinant of intentions to screen for breast cancer. The standard measure of perceived barriers to breast cancer screening is an 11 item scale developed by Victoria Champion. However, perceived barriers emerge and change over time, and Champion's perceived barriers scale was last revised in 1999. Moreover, the original scale did not address barriers which may be more pronounced in particular populations, such as congruity of action with faith. As part of the Utah Screening Project, a sample of women 40-74 (N = 341, Mage = 51.19, SD = 8.11) were recruited from four Utah counties in 2014 to complete a survey. The results revealed that the four new perceived barrier items explained 6.4 % of intentions to screen, above and beyond other predictors. In addition to barriers identified in past research, the current study identified several novel barriers including (a) concerns about negative effects to breast implants, (b) perceived conflict with faith, and the (c) perception that mammography is no longer recommended. The new perceived barriers items are useful to researchers interested in exploring barriers not addressed by the original instrument. The barriers also suggest potential belief-based targets and channels (e.g., plastic surgery clinics, faith-based interventions) for delivering mammography interventions.

The Process of Breast Augmentation with Special Focus on Patient Education, Patient Selection and Implant Selection.

Breast augmentation remains one of the most commonly performed plastic surgical procedures worldwide; however, Food and Drug Administration clinical trials have suggested that this procedure has a reoperation rate of 14% to 24% after 3 years. Recent literature has proposed that breast augmentation should not only be a surgical procedure but ultimately a surgical process to reduce postoperative complications and enhance patient satisfaction. The process of breast augmentation has been documented to optimize postsurgical outcomes and includes the following 4 steps: patient education, tissue-based planning, refined surgical techniques, and defined postoperative management.

Informed consent in Italy-traditional versus the law: a gordian knot.

BACKGROUND: Italian law no. 86 of 5 June 2012, which establishes a set of rules on the matter of breast implants, came into effect in July 2012. The law is at the center of a widespread and animated cultural debate that in recent years has been taking place in Italy. DISCUSSION: The fundamental prohibition imposed by the law concerns the age limit. Breast implants for exclusively aesthetic purposes are allowed only if the legal age (18 years) has been reached. This prohibition does not apply in cases of severe congenital malformations certified by a physician operating within the National Health Service or by a public health care institution. The legal imposition of an age limit raises a number of perplexities: one at a bioethical level and one that is strictly juridical. In fact, it is impossible to deal with this issue unless the wider debate concerning the self-determination and autonomy of underage patients in biomedical matters is considered. It appears, then, that the issue is again exclusively related to the peculiarity of cosmetic surgery, which when aimed at correcting "only" the pathologic experiences of self-image, does not acquire the dignity of therapy. If, however, the improvement of self-image serves to achieve a better psycho-emotional balance and favors the development of social relations undermined by evident physical defects, age restrictions can be disregarded. The authors believe the real risk is that the law imposed by the Italian state is based on assumptions and preformed value judgments. Furthermore, in the understanding of needs, legislation often is biased toward objective biophysical problems without attaching due importance to subjective psychological and social problems. While acknowledging the seriousness of the issue, the authors do not agree with the legislature's rigidity. However, plastic surgeons must form a plan for addressing the concerns about breast implants and evaluating whether they are appropriate for adolescents, taking into account the unique psychological and developmental considerations of adolescent cosmetic surgery patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Quality of life and anxiety of patients affected by the PIP/Rofil Medical breast implant recall: results from a prospective monocentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: The PIP/Rofil Medical breast implant recall affected around 40,000 women worldwide. An impact on quality of life (QoL) has been suspected but not yet reported. OBJECTIVE: To quantify QoL and anxiety in affected women with respect to implant indication and their removal. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Women who attended consultation and opted for implant removal between December 2011 and 2012 were eligible for study. Quality of life and anxiety were measured using validated questionnaires pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients completed at least one questionnaire, of which 32 had received implants for breast cancer, 15 for aesthetic augmentation, and 8 for primary breast malformations. Removal of the implants improved QoL in every group, especially those who had malformations. The QoL of breast cancer patients was generally better compared to the patients with implant for other reasons. CONCLUSION: The recall of PIP/Rofil Medical breast implants had a measurable impact on QoL in affected women and no pathological worry was measurable among those women.