Revising Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Adam M Goodreau, Cassandra R Driscoll, Anthony Nye, Lauren C Nigro, Nadia P Blanchet
Author Information
  1. Adam M Goodreau: From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth School of Medicine.
  2. Cassandra R Driscoll: From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth School of Medicine.
  3. Anthony Nye: From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth School of Medicine.
  4. Lauren C Nigro: From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth School of Medicine.
  5. Nadia P Blanchet: From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Virginia Commonwealth School of Medicine.

Abstract

SUMMARY: Prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction continues to gain popularity, largely due to its decreased postoperative pain, animation deformity, and operative time as compared to subpectoral reconstruction. Widespread use has led to opportunities for surgical revisions. While some techniques for submuscular reconstruction revisions, such as implant exchange and fat grafting, also apply to prepectoral revisions, others require modification for the prepectoral space. The prosthesis' unique reliance on the mastectomy flaps and acellular dermal matrix for support leads to a progressive alteration of the breast footprint, conus, envelope, and nipple-areola complex position. To date, revisions of prepectoral reconstructions have not been addressed in the literature. This article presents the senior author's (N.P.B.) techniques for (1) revising prepectoral breast reconstructions, including staged and direct-to-implant reconstructions, with a special focus on nipple-sparing reconstruction, and (2) minimizing undesirable outcomes of prepectoral reconstruction.

References

  1. Apte A, Walsh M, Balaji P, Khor B, Chandrasekharan S, Chakravorty A. Single stage immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix and implant: Defining the risks and outcomes of post-mastectomy radiotherapy. The Surgeon. 2020;18:202–207.
  2. Mitchell MP, Wagner J, Butterworth J. Subcutaneous implant-based breast reconstruction, a modern challenge in postmastectomy radiation planning. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2018;8:153–156.
  3. Jones G, Antony AK. Single stage, direct to implant pre-pectoral breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 2019;8:53–60.
  4. Wazir U, Mokbel K. The evolving role of pre-pectoral ADM-assisted approach in implant-based immediate breast reconstruction following conservative mastectomy: An overview of the literature and description of technique. In Vivo. 2018;32:1477–1480.
  5. Walia GS, Aston J, Bello R, et al. Prepectoral versus subpectoral tissue expander placement: A clinical and quality of life outcomes study. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2018;6:e1731.
  6. Jafferbhoy S, Chandarana M, Houlihan M, et al. Early multicentre experience of pre-pectoral implant based immediate breast reconstruction using Braxon. Gland Surg. 2017;6:682–688.
  7. Martinovic ME, Blanchet NP. BFACE: A framework for evaluating breast aesthetics. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:287e–295e.
  8. Nigro LC, Blanchet NP. Animation deformity in postmastectomy implant-based reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1407.
  9. Martinovic ME, Pellicane JV, Blanchet NP. Surgical delay of the nipple-areolar complex in high-risk nipple-sparing mastectomy reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e760.
  10. Jensen JA, Lin JH, Kapoor N, Giuliano AE. Surgical delay of the nipple-areolar complex: A powerful technique to maximize nipple viability following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3171–3176.
  11. Harris R, Raphael P, Harris SW. Thermal capsulorrhaphy: A modified technique for breast pocket revision. Aesthet Surg J. 2014;34:1041–1049.
  12. Wu C, Cipriano J, Osgood G, Tepper D, Siddiqui A. Human acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm) dimensional changes and stretching in tissue expander/implant-based breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013;66:1376–1381.
  13. Nahabedian MY. Does AlloDerm stretch? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120:1276–1280.
  14. Sbitany H, Gomez-Sanchez C, Piper M, Lentz R. Prepectoral breast reconstruction in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy: An assessment of clinical outcomes and benefits. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019;143:10–20.
  15. Sigalove S, Maxwell GP, Sigalove NM, et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction and postmastectomy radiotherapy: Short-term outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1631.
  16. Zhang S, Blanchet NP. Reelevating the mastectomy flap: A safe technique for improving nipple-areolar complex malposition after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017;5:e1426.
  17. Mayer AP, Goodreau AM, Blanchet NP. Accurate nipple areolar positioning in nipple-sparing mastectomy reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7:e2064.

MeSH Term

Acellular Dermis
Adult
Aged
Breast Implantation
Female
Humans
Mammaplasty
Mastectomy
Middle Aged
Pectoralis Muscles
Reoperation
Retrospective Studies
Young Adult

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0reconstructionprepectoralrevisionsbreastreconstructionsPrepectoraltechniquesSUMMARY:prostheticcontinuesgainpopularitylargelyduedecreasedpostoperativepainanimationdeformityoperativetimecomparedsubpectoralWidespreaduseledopportunitiessurgicalsubmuscularimplantexchangefatgraftingalsoapplyothersrequiremodificationspaceprosthesis'uniquereliancemastectomyflapsacellulardermalmatrixsupportleadsprogressivealterationfootprintconusenvelopenipple-areolacomplexpositiondateaddressedliteraturearticlepresentsseniorauthor'sNPB1revisingincludingstageddirect-to-implantspecialfocusnipple-sparing2minimizingundesirableoutcomesRevisingBreastReconstruction

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.