Prepectoral Site Conversion for Animation Deformity

Jones, Glyn; King, Victor A.; Yoo, Aran

doi:10.1097/gox.0000000000002301

Cited by 14 publications

(40 citation statements)

References 27 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Six of 18 studies had no conflicts of interest to declare. 28 , 30 , 33 , 35 , 36 , 38 However, no funding or financial support was received from any company for any of the included studies. The relative small sample size (<100 breasts) in 9 studies, the fact that many studies were set as retrospective analysis, and the lack of correction of the confounding factors limited the power of statistical analysis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complication Rate of Prepectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrices

Mangialardi

Salgarello

Cacciatore

et al. 2020

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) is currently the most frequently performed reconstructive technique post mastectomy. Even though submuscular IBR continues to be the most commonly used technique, mastectomy technique optimization, the possibility to check skin viability with indocyanine green angiography, the enhanced propensity of patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomies, and the introduction of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) have paved the way to the rediscovery of the subcutaneous reconstruction technique. The aim of this article is to update the complication rate of immediate and delayed prepectoral IBR using human ADMs (hADMs). Methods: A literature search, using PubMed, Medline, Cochrane, and Google Scholar database according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines, was conducted to evaluate complication rates of prepectoral implant–based reconstructions using hADMs. The following MeSH terms were used: “prepectoral breast reconstruction acellular dermal matrix,” “prepectoral breast reconstruction ADM,” “human ADM breast reconstruction,” and “human acellular dermal matrix breast reconstruction” (period: 2005–2020; the last search took place on April 2, 2020). Results: This meta-analysis includes 1425 patients (2270 breasts) who had undergone immediate or delayed prepectoral IBR using different types of hADMs. The overall complication rate amounted to 19%. The most frequent complication was represented by infection (7.9%), followed by seroma (4.8%), mastectomy flap necrosis (3.4%), and implant loss (2.8%). Conclusions: The overall complication rate was 19%. The most frequent complications were infection, seroma, and mastectomy flap necrosis, while capsular contracture was rare.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Complication Rate of Prepectoral Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Using Human Acellular Dermal Matrices

Mangialardi

Salgarello

Cacciatore

et al. 2020

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery - Global Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… 18 Among the ten selected articles, seven were retrospective studies 22 , 23 , 24 , 25. , 26 , 28 , 30 and three were prospective studies. 21 , 27 , 29 A total of 504 breasts were included in the review and the sample size of each article ranged from 8 to 142 breasts.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Chronic pain and implant malposition represented the other two indications mentioned respectively in six 24 , 25 , 27 , 28 , 29 and three articles. 23 , 26 , 27…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(alone 7/22; ADM 15/22) Complete capsulectomy – 15/22 Complete coverage Gabriel, 2018 25 Depending on the thickness and tightness of the skin flap, a direct-to-implant or two-stage tissue expander/implant reconstruction Lower pole ADM was removed as much as possible to redrape the PM back to the chest wall. In patients who had an LAD flap placed at the lower pole during primary reconstruction, the PM was detached from the flap, which was retained at the lower pole Anterior and inferior capsulectomy Round silicone implant Size: 603cc (400–800) Alloderm 16 × 20 cm Anterior coverage Jones, 2019 26 PM dissection from the overlying mastectomy skin Anchorage of PM – >FX or FF implant profile Alloderm 16 × 20 Anterior coverage Bilezikian, 2019 27 Acellular dermal matrix drape and fluorescent imaging (ADFI) protocol – Round, smooth Size: 240–800cc DermACELL 16 × 20 cm micromeshed Lenz, 2019 28 Once the superior flap is well elevated, the implant is removed and a complete open periprosthetic capsulectomy is performed. Complete capsulectomy Upsize 90.36cc Smooth round cohesive or responsive silicone gel (Allergan) 15 ADM 7 no ADM 2 sheets Complete anterior and posterior coverage Mangialardi 2019 29 The plane over the anterior capsule was undermined.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… Study Follow-up AD Chronic pain Pt's satisfaction Cosmetic Revision Fat graft Capsulectomy Implant change Sbitany, 2014 21 9 100% resolution – – – – – – Hammond, 2015 22 13.8 100% resolution – 16 pts (84.2) 6 2 (155 cc) 4 2 Schnars, 2016 23 – 100% resolution – – – – – – Lenz, 2017 24 – 100% resolution 100% resolution – 1 – 1 1 Gabriel, 2018 25 16,7 100% resolution Not evaluated although patients did not report pain during the follow-up period. – Yes Yes – – Jones, 2019 26 19.2 100% resolution Improved range of shoulder motion – 26 25 (130 cc) – 1 smaller implant size Bilezikian, 2019 27 24 100% resolution 100% resolution - None - - - Lenz, 2019 28 8.3 100% resolution – – 6 (21.4% of the group that did not undergo fat grafting, compared to 0% revisions performed on the group that had undergone fat grafting; p<0...…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prepectoral implant pocket conversion in breast reconstruction

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction While many authors have reported their experience in immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction (BR), implant pocket conversion from a submuscular to a prepectoral plane is less well described. The aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive review on plane conversion in implant-based BR, including the indications, surgical techniques, functional, and esthetic results. Materials and Methods A literature search via PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases was performed using the following MeSH terms: “prepectoral pocket conversion”, “subcutaneous pocket conversion”, “prepectoral plane conversion”, “subcutaneous plane conversion”, and “prepectoral breast reconstruction”. Results Ten articles in which 504 breasts were studied were deemed eligible for inclusion. The indications to perform plane conversion were animation deformity (AD), chronic pain, and implant malposition. Seven studies described complete or partial capsulectomy. The use of acellular dermal matrices (ADM) was reported in all cases except for three studies. The mean follow-up was 10.64 months. There was resolution of AD in 100% of cases. Three studies reported complete resolution of chronic pain. The overall complication rate was 12.102% and capsular contracture (CC) was the most frequent complication. Cosmetic revisions were reported in six studies (9.52%). The use of ADMs and fat grafting appeared to decrease the rate of subsequent CC formation and cosmetic revisions. Conclusions The current article represents the first review about implant pocket conversion from a submuscular to a prepectoral plane, delineating its indications, surgical technique, postoperative complications, and functional and esthetic outcomes.

show abstract