From Sub-Pectoral to Pre-Pectoral Implant Reconstruction: A Decisional Algorithm to Optimise Outcomes of Breast Replacement Surgery.

Glenda Giorgia Caputo, Sebastiano Mura, Filippo Contessi Negrini, Roberta Albanese, Pier Camillo Parodi
Author Information
  1. Glenda Giorgia Caputo: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DAME-Department of Medical Area, University Hospital of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy. ORCID
  2. Sebastiano Mura: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DAME-Department of Medical Area, University Hospital of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  3. Filippo Contessi Negrini: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DAME-Department of Medical Area, University Hospital of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  4. Roberta Albanese: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DAME-Department of Medical Area, University Hospital of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy.
  5. Pier Camillo Parodi: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, DAME-Department of Medical Area, University Hospital of Udine, 33100 Udine, Italy.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Innovations and advancements with implant-based breast reconstruction, such as the use of ADMs, fat grafting, NSMs, and better implants, have enabled surgeons to now place breast implants in the pre-pectoral space rather than under the pectoralis major muscle. Breast implant replacement surgery in post-mastectomy patients, with pocket conversion from retro-pectoral to pre-pectoral, is becoming increasingly common, in order to solve the drawbacks of retro-pectoral implant positioning (animation deformity, chronic pain, and poor implant positioning).
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A multicentric retrospective study was conducted, considering all patients previously submitted to implant-based post-mastectomy breast reconstruction who underwent a breast implant replacement with pocket conversion procedure at the University Hospital of Udine-Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Department-and "Centro di Riferimento Oncologico" (C.R.O.) of Aviano, from January 2020 to September 2021. Patients were candidates for a breast implant replacement with pocket conversion procedure if they met the following inclusion criteria: they underwent a previous implant-based post-mastectomy breast reconstruction and developed animation deformity, chronic pain, severe capsular contracture, or implant malposition. Patient data included age, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities, smoking status, pre- or post-mastectomy radiotherapy (RT), tumour classification, type of mastectomy, previous or ancillary procedures (lipofilling), type and volume of implant used, type of ADM, and post-operative complications (breast infection, implant exposure and malposition, haematoma, or seroma).
RESULTS: A total of 31 breasts (30 patients) were included in this analysis. Just three months after surgery, we recorded 100% resolution of the problems for which pocket conversion was indicated, which was confirmed at 6, 9, and 12 months post-operative. We also developed an algorithm describing the correct steps for successful breast-implant pocket conversion.
CONCLUSION: Our results, although only early experience, are very encouraging. We realized that, besides gentle surgical handling, one of the most important factors in proper pocket conversion selection is an accurate pre-operative and intra-operative clinical evaluation of the tissue thickness in all breast quadrants.

Keywords

References

  1. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Dec;140(6S Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction):7S-13S [PMID: 29166342]
  2. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Nov;140(5S Advances in Breast Reconstruction):51S-59S [PMID: 29064922]
  3. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1981 Mar;67(3):312-7 [PMID: 7232564]
  4. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2021 May 1;147(5):743e-748e [PMID: 33890886]
  5. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2017 Aug 8;5(8):e1439 [PMID: 28894660]
  6. Clin Breast Cancer. 2021 Aug;21(4):344-351 [PMID: 33308993]
  7. Gland Surg. 2019 Feb;8(1):75-81 [PMID: 30842931]
  8. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Feb;139(2):287-294 [PMID: 28121858]
  9. Breast J. 2021 Apr;27(4):412-414 [PMID: 33550687]
  10. J Invest Surg. 2022 Apr;35(4):841-847 [PMID: 34015977]
  11. Ann Plast Surg. 2020 Dec;85(6):691-698 [PMID: 32102001]
  12. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2020 Mar;145(3):632-642 [PMID: 32097297]
  13. Cancer Control. 2018 Jan-Mar;25(1):1073274817744638 [PMID: 29334788]
  14. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010 Jan;125(1):363-371 [PMID: 20048627]
  15. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017 Sep;140(3):432-443 [PMID: 28574950]
  16. JPRAS Open. 2020 Sep 07;26:12-25 [PMID: 32995458]
  17. Aesthet Surg J. 2018 Apr 06;38(5):519-526 [PMID: 29365064]
  18. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2021 Mar-Apr;116(2 Suppl):16-23 [PMID: 33963692]

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0breastimplantpocketconversionreplacementsurgerypost-mastectomyimplant-basedreconstructionpre-pectoralpatientsanimationdeformitytypeimplantsBreastretro-pectoralpositioningchronicpainunderwentprocedureSurgerypreviousdevelopedmalpositionincludedpost-operativemonthsBACKGROUND:InnovationsadvancementsuseADMsfatgraftingNSMsbetterenabledsurgeonsnowplacespaceratherpectoralismajormusclebecomingincreasinglycommonordersolvedrawbackspoorMATERIALSANDMETHODS:multicentricretrospectivestudyconductedconsideringpreviouslysubmittedUniversityHospitalUdine-PlasticReconstructiveDepartment-and"CentrodiRiferimentoOncologico"CROAvianoJanuary2020September2021Patientscandidatesmetfollowinginclusioncriteria:severecapsularcontracturePatientdataagebodymassindexBMIcomorbiditiessmokingstatuspre-radiotherapyRTtumourclassificationmastectomyancillaryprocedureslipofillingvolumeusedADMcomplicationsinfectionexposurehaematomaseromaRESULTS:total31breasts30analysisJustthreerecorded100%resolutionproblemsindicatedconfirmed6912alsoalgorithmdescribingcorrectstepssuccessfulbreast-implantCONCLUSION:resultsalthoughearlyexperienceencouragingrealizedbesidesgentlesurgicalhandlingoneimportantfactorsproperselectionaccuratepre-operativeintra-operativeclinicalevaluationtissuethicknessquadrantsSub-PectoralPre-PectoralImplantReconstruction:DecisionalAlgorithmOptimiseOutcomesReplacementexchangesecondary

Similar Articles

Cited By