Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Ano de publicação
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Ann Plast Surg ; 92(4S Suppl 2): S179-S184, 2024 Apr 01.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38556670

RESUMO

PURPOSE: Nipple-areolar complex (NAC) viability remains a significant concern following prepectoral tissue expander (TE) reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). This study assesses the impact of intraoperative TE fill on NAC necrosis and identifies strategies for mitigating this risk. METHODS: A chart review of all consecutive, prepectoral TEs placed immediately after NSM was performed between March 2017 and December 2022 at a single center. Demographics, mastectomy weight, intraoperative TE fill, and complications were extracted for all patients. Partial NAC necrosis was defined as any thickness of skin loss including part of the NAC, whereas total NAC necrosis was defined as full-thickness skin loss involving the entirety of the NAC. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Forty-six patients (83 breasts) with an average follow-up of 22 months were included. Women were on average 46 years old, nonsmoker (98%), and nondiabetic (100%) and had a body mass index of 23 kg/m2. All reconstructions were performed immediately following prophylactic mastectomies in 49% and therapeutic mastectomies in 51% of cases. Three breasts (4%) were radiated, and 15 patients (33%) received chemotherapy. Mean mastectomy weight was 346 ± 274 g, median intraoperative TE fill was 150 ± 225 mL, and median final TE fill was 350 ± 170 mL. Partial NAC necrosis occurred in 7 breasts (8%), and there were zero instances of complete NAC necrosis. On univariate analysis, partial NAC necrosis was not associated with any patient demographic or operative characteristics, including intraoperative TE fill. In multivariable models controlling for age, body mass index, mastectomy weight, prior breast surgery, and intraoperative TE fill, partial NAC necrosis was associated with lower body mass index (odds ratio, 0.53; confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.98; P < 0.05) and higher mastectomy weight (odds ratio, 1.1; CI, 1.01-1.20; P < 0.05). Prior breast surgery approached significance, as those breasts had a 19.4 times higher odds of partial NAC necrosis (95% CI, 0.88-427.6; P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Nipple-areolar complex necrosis following prepectoral TE reconstruction is a rare but serious complication. In this study of 83 breasts, 7 (8%) developed partial NAC necrosis, and all but one were able to be salvaged.


Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Mamoplastia , Mastectomia Subcutânea , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Mastectomia/efeitos adversos , Mamilos/cirurgia , Neoplasias da Mama/complicações , Estudos Retrospectivos , Mastectomia Subcutânea/efeitos adversos , Mamoplastia/efeitos adversos , Necrose/etiologia , Necrose/prevenção & controle
2.
Aesthet Surg J ; 44(9): NP629-NP636, 2024 Aug 20.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38636098

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Breast implant illness (BII) has become a contentious subject in recent years. Although some studies have reported associations between breast implants and autoimmune diseases, others have failed to establish a definitive link. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to provide a comprehensive, up-to-date evaluation of the literature surrounding BII, with an emphasis on identifying patient-related factors that may be associated with BII. METHODS: A systematic review was performed following PRISMA guidelines by searching the PubMed (MEDLINE), Embase, and Cochrane databases for relevant studies published in the last 20 years. RESULTS: Thirty-one studies were included, which covered 39,505 implant patients with a mean [standard deviation] age of 44.2 [9.30] years. Fifteen studies reported implant explantation status, with 72.4% patients choosing to remove their implants. Among these, 9 studies reported symptom improvement in 83.5% patients. Fifty-three percent of patients undergoing explantation had total capsulectomy. Twenty-eight studies documented total numbers of patients experiencing symptoms related to BII, with 31.3% patients reporting such symptoms. Among these, 16 studies of 4109 BII patients distinguished whether the reason for implantation was cosmetic augmentation or reconstruction. When specified, more patients experiencing BII-related symptoms received implants for "cosmetic" vs "reconstructive" reasons (cosmetic, 3864/4109 [94.0%] vs reconstruction, 245/4109 [5.96%]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This review provides an overview of the current state of knowledge regarding BII. The study highlights a potential relationship between BII and indication for implants (cosmetic vs reconstructive) among other variables, offering valuable insight on factors associated with BII and directions for future research.


Assuntos
Implante Mamário , Implantes de Mama , Remoção de Dispositivo , Humanos , Implantes de Mama/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Implante Mamário/efeitos adversos , Implante Mamário/instrumentação , Doenças Autoimunes/cirurgia , Doenças Autoimunes/diagnóstico , Fatores de Risco , Mamoplastia/efeitos adversos , Mamoplastia/métodos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA