Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Skin-Reducing Mastectomy with Prepectoral Polyuretane (Pu) Implant Covered with an Autologous Dermo-Adipose Flap.

Fedele Lembo, Liberato Roberto Cecchino, Domenico Parisi, Aurelio Portincasa
Author Information
  1. Fedele Lembo: Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Foggia Medical School, University of Foggia, via Pinto, 71121, Foggia, Italy. lembofedele@gmail.com. ORCID
  2. Liberato Roberto Cecchino: Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Foggia Medical School, University of Foggia, via Pinto, 71121, Foggia, Italy.
  3. Domenico Parisi: Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Foggia Medical School, University of Foggia, via Pinto, 71121, Foggia, Italy.
  4. Aurelio Portincasa: Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Foggia Medical School, University of Foggia, via Pinto, 71121, Foggia, Italy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to present our new technique of immediate breast reconstruction with prepectoral Polyuretane (PU) Implants, covered with an autologous dermo-adipose flap, in skin-reducing mastectomy both for risk-reducing (prophylactic mastectomy) and therapeutic cases.
METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective review of 21 patients (mean age 47 years), undergone skin-reducing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with prepectoral Polyuretane (PU) Implants, covered with an autologous dermo-adipose flap, un the period January 2018-June 2021. All procedures were performed by the same surgeon.
RESULTS: A total of 36 skin-reducing mastectomies (6 curative, 15 prophylactic) with one-stage prepectoral PU foam-coated implant and autologous dermo-adipose flap reconstruction were performed. All postoperative complications were collected. Quality of life (QoL) and satisfaction with reconstruction were evaluated through the BREAST-Q questionnaire, administered preoperatively and at 12 months after surgery. Independent Student's t tests were used to compare means of continuous variables and Chi-square test was used for ordinal variables. A p-value ���0.05 was considered statistically significant. Uni- and multiple linear regression analyses were used to confirm all results. Out of 21 patients, we observed one small wound dehiscence and one partial Nipple-Areola Complex (NAC) necrosis. All cases of minor complications were managed conservatively and did not affect the quality of the final outcome. No implant loss was observed. No significant severe capsular contracture (grade III or IV) was detected at follow-up. Overall satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being all significantly increased, analyzing BRAST-Q data. Statistical analysis showed a significant influence of diabetes on the risk of complications.
CONCLUSIONS: Our experience suggests that the procedure described is effective, feasible and cost-effective. It is easier to perform compared to similar and more demanding procedure, reduces operative time, and minimizes complications related to manipulation of the pectoralis major muscle, while also contributing to the containment of costs. Moreover, it appears to be oncologically safe, provides good esthetic results with low postoperative complication rate and leads to high level of patients' satisfaction.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: 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 .

Keywords

References

  1. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 May 1;147(5):1046-1057 [PMID: 33835085]
  2. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Oct;25(10):2899-2908 [PMID: 29978367]
  3. Natl Cancer Inst Carcinog Tech Rep Ser. 1979;162:1-139 [PMID: 12799700]
  4. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016 Jun;137(6):1702-1705 [PMID: 27219226]
  5. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2021 Aug 10;9(8):e3745 [PMID: 34386310]
  6. Gland Surg. 2019 Feb;8(1):53-60 [PMID: 30842928]
  7. BJS Open. 2021 Jan 8;5(1): [PMID: 33609398]
  8. Breast. 2012 Jun;21(3):267-71 [PMID: 21435877]
  9. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Dec 28;5(12):e1631 [PMID: 29632799]
  10. Ann Plast Surg. 2022 May 1;88(3 Suppl 3):S205-S208 [PMID: 35513321]
  11. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Sep;140(3):432-443 [PMID: 28574950]
  12. Lancet Oncol. 2019 Feb;20(2):254-266 [PMID: 30639093]
  13. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Jul 12;5(7):e1371 [PMID: 28831335]
  14. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2019 Jul;72(7):1051-1059 [PMID: 31076195]
  15. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 Feb 1;147(2):305-315 [PMID: 33177453]
  16. Surgeon. 2020 Aug;18(4):202-207 [PMID: 31636037]
  17. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Jan;143(1):1e-9e [PMID: 30303929]
  18. Arch Plast Surg. 2015 Mar;42(2):186-93 [PMID: 25798390]
  19. Clin Breast Cancer. 2018 Aug;18(4):e703-e711 [PMID: 29275104]
  20. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Jan;143(1):10-20 [PMID: 30589770]
  21. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1997 Oct;100(5):1291-8 [PMID: 9326795]
  22. Minerva Surg. 2022 Oct;77(5):473-480 [PMID: 34693673]
  23. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2020 Jun;44(3):673-676 [PMID: 32300878]
  24. Ann Plast Surg. 2019 Jun;82(6S Suppl 5):S404-S409 [PMID: 30694844]

MeSH Term

Humans
Female
Middle Aged
Retrospective Studies
Mammaplasty
Adult
Surgical Flaps
Breast Neoplasms
Quality of Life
Patient Satisfaction
Adipose Tissue
Breast Implants
Esthetics
Treatment Outcome
Mastectomy
Cohort Studies
Mastectomy, Subcutaneous
Time Factors

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0reconstructionmastectomycomplicationsprepectoralPolyuretanePUautologousdermo-adiposeflapskin-reducingperformedsatisfactionusedsignificantimmediatebreastImplantscoveredprophylacticcases21patientsimplantpostoperativeBREAST-QvariablesresultsobservedoneprocedurelevelReconstructionPrepectoralBACKGROUND:aimstudypresentnewtechniquerisk-reducingtherapeuticMETHODS:single-centerretrospectivereviewmeanage47yearsundergoneunperiodJanuary2018-June2021proceduressurgeonRESULTS:total36mastectomies6curative15one-stagefoam-coatedcollectedQualitylifeQoLevaluatedquestionnaireadministeredpreoperatively12monthssurgeryIndependentStudent'sttestscomparemeanscontinuousChi-squaretestordinalp-value���005consideredstatisticallyUni-multiplelinearregressionanalysesconfirmsmallwounddehiscencepartialNipple-AreolaComplexNACnecrosisminormanagedconservativelyaffectqualityfinaloutcomelossseverecapsularcontracturegradeIIIIVdetectedfollow-upOverallbreastspsychosocialphysicalsexualwell-beingsignificantlyincreasedanalyzingBRAST-QdataStatisticalanalysisshowedinfluencediabetesriskCONCLUSIONS:experiencesuggestsdescribedeffectivefeasiblecost-effectiveeasierperformcomparedsimilardemandingreducesoperativetimeminimizesrelatedmanipulationpectoralismajormusclealsocontributingcontainmentcostsMoreoverappearsoncologicallysafeprovidesgoodestheticlowcomplicationrateleadshighpatients'LEVELOFEVIDENCEIV:journalrequiresauthorsassignevidencearticlefulldescriptionEvidence-BasedMedicineratingspleasereferTableContentsonlineInstructionsAuthorswwwspringercom/00266ImmediateBreastSkin-ReducingMastectomyPuImplantCoveredAutologousDermo-AdiposeFlapPolyurethaneSkin-reducing

Similar Articles

Cited By