We present a maneuver in which negative pressure is used to ease the insertion of gel prosthesis in augmentation mammoplasty and, therefore, reduce the risk of prosthetic rupture during surgery. A polyvinyl urethral catheter, inserted in the areolar incision, is attached to the surgery room vacuum pump. The negative pressure thus created allows the prosthesis to be inserted safely.

No abstract

Metodologia para análise de resultados em lipoaspiraçãoMethodology for analysis of results in liposuction RESUMO Introdução: A lipoaspiração é hoje método padrão para tratamento das lipodistrofias. Entretanto, a amplitude das áreas a serem tratadas torna complexa a avaliação dos resultados perioperatórios. Método: Neste artigo, descrevemos nova tática que objetiva o controle perioperatório da lipoaspiração. Medidas pré-operatórias da espessura da prega cutânea foram realizadas com uso de adipômetro e régua. As regiões aferidas foram padronizadas. A prega axilar anterior entre a nona e décima costela é utilizada como referência para o resultado da lipoaspiração abdominal superior, inferior bilateral e de flancos. Assimetrias ou hipocorreção das áreas tratadas são minimizadas. Durante a consulta médica há a demonstração com números das medidas no pré e pós-operatório. Conclusão: Esta conduta evita análises subjetivas. Deste modo a relação médico-paciente é facilitada com a redução do risco de conflito.Descritores: Lipectomia. Cirurgia Plástica. Estética. Tecido Adiposo. aBStRaCt Introduction: Liposuction is the standard method for lipodistrophy treatment. Perioperative results evaluation is difficult due to amplitude of areas to be treated. Methods: This article describes a new method of perioperative results control during liposuction. Cutaneous fold thickness of standard areas are measured using adipometer and scale in the preoperative period. Cutaneous thickness on anterior axilar fold between ninth and tenth ribs is used as reference for superior and inferior abdominal and flanks liposuction. Treated areas asymmetries or hipocorrection are minimized. During medical consulting there is a demonstration of preoperative and postoperative measured values. Conclusion: This conduct avoids subjective analysis facilitating doctor patient relation with conflict risk reducing.

Augmentation mastoplasty with silicone implant associated with mastopexy through an initial periareolar approach Augmentation mastoplasty with silicone implant associated with mastopexy through an initial periareolar approach (safety pocket) Mastoplastia de aumento com inclusão de implante de silicone associado a mastopexia com abordagem inicial periareolar (safety pocket) ABSTRACT Background: Mastopexy with breast implant surgery is a challenging and highly complex surgical procedure. In Brazil, there is growing interest in larger breast volumes, although in certain cases, the sole addition of silicone implants is not sufficient for constructing a conical breast with a full upper pole. To obtain this result, it is necessary to correct sagging breasts by removing excess skin. Methods: The initial approach was made with an inferior semicircular periareolar incision, which provided subfascial access to the breast pocket for inclusion of the implant. After implant placement, the excess skin was marked using simple stitches and staining with methylene blue prior to resection. Longitudinal spindle marking was preferred whenever possible. However, "L" or inverted "T" markings were also used when excess skin amounts were greater. Results: We analyzed 49 patients aged 20-68 years, of whom 28 were undergoing primary breast surgery and 21 were undergoing secondary breast surgery. The surgeries for breast pexia included L-shaped scars in 23 patients, T-shaped scars in 8 patients, and vertical scars in 18 patients. Six complications were observed in this group of patients: hematoma (n = 2), scar retraction (n = 2), severe ecchymosis (n = 1), and steatonecrosis (n = 1). Conclusions: The conservative skin removal approach after prosthesis implantation, periareolar access, and use of the subfascial plane are the differential and relevant points of this technique. This technique is also considered safer because the periareolar incision caused the only loss of continuity in the tissues. Therefore, the prosthesis was not exposed during mastopexy.

No abstract