The preliminary results are encouraging from aesthetic and clinical viewpoints. Further studies are planned to evaluate long-term results.

We report the outcomes of the European prospective study on prepectoral breast reconstruction using preshaped acellular dermal matrix for complete breast implant coverage. Seventy-nine patients were enrolled between April 2014 and August 2015 all over Europe using a single protocol for patient selection and surgical procedure, according to the Association of Breast Surgery and British Association of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons joint guidelines for the use of acellular dermal matrix in breast surgery. The preshaped matrix completely wraps the breast implant, which is placed above the pectoralis major, without detaching the muscle. A total of 100 prepectoral breast reconstructions with complete implant coverage were performed. This series, with mean follow-up of 17.9 months, had two cases of implant loss (2.0%) including one necrosis of the nipple and one wound breakdown (1.0% respectively). No implant rotations were observed. Good cosmetic outcomes were obtained with natural movement of the breasts and softness to the touch; none of the patients reported experiencing pain or reduction in the movements of the pectoralis major muscle postoperatively. The use of preshaped acellular dermal matrix for a complete breast implant coverage in selected patients is safe and gives satisfactory results, both from the aesthetic view point and the low postoperative complication rates. Further studies reporting long-term outcomes are planned.

Background The use of conservative mastectomies has risen significantly during the last few years. The reconstructive choice of direct-to-implant reconstruction has become more practicable with modern mastectomy techniques. The initial trend in Italian centers was to use dualplane hybrid reconstruction. However, a high level of complications has been registered. From 2015 onward, in our centers, a pre-pectoral approach has been adopted. The authors sought to describe the Italian trend to gradually discard the sub-pectoral technique with lower lateral pole coverage of the prosthesis using ADMs comparing it with the pre-pectoral approach with ADMs, without any muscle dissection, in terms of complication rates. Materials and Methods A multicenter retrospective clinical study was performed from January 2010 to June 2018. The enrolled patients were divided into two groups: Cases with an ADM-only coverage pre-pectoral reconstruction made up the first group (Group 1). Those with the retropectoral muscular position ? ADM implant coverage comprised the second one (Group 2). Complications such as seroma, hematoma, wound dehiscence, surgical site infection, reconstruction failure, animation deformity and capsular contracture were recorded. Results We performed 716 direct-to-implant reconstructions: 509 were partially sub-pectoral and 207 were prepectoral. Minimum follow-up was 1 year. Incidence of complications was higher in dual-plane reconstructions. There were statistical significant differences in the rates of seroma and hematoma. Conclusion Using the pre-pectoral approach, the authors have experienced favorable aesthetics and superior clinical and functional outcomes. Retro-pectoral muscular ADM implant coverage has to be considered only in specific complicated second-stage surgeries.

Advances in implantable biologic and synthetic products over the last decade have enabled surgeons to replace traditional submuscular implant-based breast reconstruction techniques with a prepectoral or muscle-sparing technique. Prepectoral breast reconstruction is becoming increasingly popular among surgeons and patients due to the preservation of normal chest wall anatomy, with the restoration of body image with minimal morbidity. In this article, we have described a guide to prepectoral or muscle-sparing breast reconstruction with a particular emphasis on patient selection, technique and postoperative outcomes. Hence, a joint consensus guide from European and USA breast and plastic reconstructive surgeons has been agreed, and a crowd-writing method has been adopted to produce this guide.

No abstract