Abstract: Management of Breast Implant Associated Infections in Breast Reconstruction

Öztürk, Can; Öztürk, Cemile Nurdan; Platek, Mary E.; Soucise, Allison; Laub, Peter; Ahsan, Nabiha; Moon, Wong; Lohman, Robert

doi:10.1097/01.gox.0000526240.26734.f6

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some studies have proposed a theory to explain this result, because higher BMI women might have larger breasts, which led to longer operative time, longer mastectomy flaps and more ischemia flaps. While these high-risk patients might not progress to stage II operation due to removal of TE in stage I operation [8,19]. Skin-sparing mastectomy was a widespread technique in breast reconstruction surgery, which preserves native skin envelope and inframammary fold [20].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…While these high-risk patients might not progress to stage II operation due to removal of TE in stage I operation [8,19]. Skin-sparing mastectomy was a widespread technique in breast reconstruction surgery, which preserves native skin envelope and inframammary fold [20]. By contrast, nipple-sparing mastectomy was an improved satisfaction surgical technique with proven oncological safety in appropriately selected patients [21,22].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Adjuvant therapy, such as chemotherapy and post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT), at further increase the risk of complications [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A nomogram to predict failure rate in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction

Zhu

Zhang

Mao

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Controversies on risk factors affecting immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) still exist. We aimed to evaluate risk factors of reconstruction failure (RF) in immediate IBBR. We retrospectively reviewed 239 patients (241 breasts) who underwent immediate IBBR from 2011 to 2019. A nomogram was established to predict RF rate in stage I operation and logistic regression model was created for stage II operation. 14 (5.81%) and 7 (5.51%) reconstructive breasts experienced RF in stage I and II operation, respectively. Body mass index ( ? BMI) [odds ratio (OR)=1.569, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.087-2.263, p =0.016], implant/tissue expander (TE) volume>86.30% (OR=5.711, 95% CI: 1.067-30.583, p =0.042), adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) (OR=30.094, 95% CI: 2.030-446.084, p =0.013) were independent risk factors for RF in stage I operation. The nomogram to predict RF rate in stage I operation revealed area under the curve (AUC) was 0.920 (95% CI: 0.844-0.995). Logistic regression demonstrated that mesh use was the independent predictor of RF in stage II operation (OR=47.326, 95% CI: 3.11-720.081, p =0.005). The nomogram exhibited satisfied predictive ability. Present findings enhanced our understanding of the risk factors contributing to RF and might lead us clinical decision to improve the outcome of immediate IBBR.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%