Projection and patient satisfaction using the “Hamburger” nipple reconstruction technique

Jones, A.P.; Erdmann, Matthias

doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2011.09.014

Cited by 23 publications

(18 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Tanabe et al, 7 Jones and Erdmann, 9 Brent and Bostwick, 5 and Rose 6 used auricular cartilage and tubularized it to achieve improved nipple projection. Tanabe et al 7 used bilobed and trilobed flaps and reported that the bilobed flap provided greater projection, whereas the trilobed flap led to decreased projection and partial flap necrosis.…”

Section: Autologous Nipple Augmentation Grafts Auricular Graftmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…Autologous materials include fat, 3,4 cartilage (auricular conchal fossa, costal), [5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] bone, 16 composite soft tissue including toe pulp, 14,[17][18][19] contralateral nipple, 8,20,21 labia minora, 21,22 and rolled dermal grafts. 23 Reported allogeneic materials have included acellular dermal matrix, [24][25][26][27][28][29] bone allograft, 16 and extracellular matrix collagen.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Systematic Review of Comparison of Autologous, Allogeneic, and Synthetic Augmentation Grafts in Nipple Reconstruction

Winocour

Saksena

et al. 2016

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Autologous Nipple Augmentation Grafts Auricular Graftmentioning

confidence: 98%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Systematic Review of Comparison of Autologous, Allogeneic, and Synthetic Augmentation Grafts in Nipple Reconstruction

Winocour

Saksena

et al. 2016

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several surgical techniques based on local flaps have been proposed to overcome this issue. Unfortunately, all local flaps have the same drawback and are associated with a loss in projection of 50-70 % over the first three postoperative years [2][3][4]. Usually, for nipple reconstruction, plastic surgeons in our research center perform the arrow flap, a modification of Thomas technique [5].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Does the arrow flap associated with dermal platform really improve long-term nipple projection?

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reconstruction of nipple-areola complex is the final step of breast reconstruction and is often identified by patients as a hallmark of the new breast. Loss of nipple projection is the factor that patients dislike most after nipple-areola reconstruction [1]. Several surgical techniques based on local flaps have been proposed to overcome this issue. Unfortunately, all local flaps have the same drawback and are associated with a loss in projection of 50-70 % over the first three postoperative years [2][3][4]. Usually, for nipple reconstruction, plastic surgeons in our research center perform the arrow flap, a modification of Thomas technique [5]. As a further modification of Thomas technique [6], Schoeller et al.recommend the use of deepithelialized base in order to obtain the stabilization of flap and less nipple projection loss [7]. In our clinical experience, we evaluate the results of a modified Barrow flap^technique with dermal platform compared to conventional Barrow flap ( Fig. 1).We retrospectively analyzed data of 16 patients undergoing delayed nipple reconstruction after postmastectomy autologous or prosthetic breast reconstruction. We considered two groups depending on surgical technique used: modified arrow flap with dermal platform (group A) or conventional arrow flap without dermal platform (group B). We calculated mean and median residual nipple projection at 1-year follow-up. In group A, the mean nipple projection after surgery was 2.44 mm. At follow-up, the mean residual projection was 26.11 % and the median residual nipple projection was 35 %. In group B, the mean nipple projection after surgery was 3.13 mm. At follow-up, the mean residual projection was 31.39 % and the median residual nipple projection was 40.71 %. The difference in median residual nipple projection was not statistically significant (p value = 0.563). In conclusion, the deepithelialized plate of the nipple presented as a modification of conventional Barrow flap^technique does not seem to improve residual nipple projection. However, high-quality randomized trials will be necessary to further evaluate possible differences in nipple reconstruction between different techniques using local flaps.

show abstract

“…5 Lasting projection is difficult to achieve and techniques have emerged to overcome this issue. [6][7][8] Studies on complications after nipple reconstruction are scarce 9,10 -only one study has explicitly described risk factors for postoperative complications after NAC reconstruction. 10 Momeni et al focused on the following parameters: age, final implant volume, time from final implant placement to nipple reconstruction, and history of radiotherapy.…”

Section: Smoking As a Risk Factor For Wound Dehiscence In Nipple Recomentioning

confidence: 99%

Smoking as a risk factor for wound dehiscence in nipple reconstruction: An analysis of 1683 cases

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In conclusion, we found smoking to be a risk factor for wound disruption following NAC reconstruction. We hope this study provides further evidence for smoking cessation prior to beginning the reconstructive process. DISCLAIMERACS NSQIP and the hospitals participating in the ACS NSQIP are the source of the data used herein; they have not verified and are not responsible for the statistical validity of the data analysis or the conclusions derived by the authors.

show abstract

Projection and patient satisfaction using the “Hamburger” nipple reconstruction technique

Cited by 23 publications

References 21 publications

A Systematic Review of Comparison of Autologous, Allogeneic, and Synthetic Augmentation Grafts in Nipple Reconstruction

A Systematic Review of Comparison of Autologous, Allogeneic, and Synthetic Augmentation Grafts in Nipple Reconstruction

Does the arrow flap associated with dermal platform really improve long-term nipple projection?

Smoking as a risk factor for wound dehiscence in nipple reconstruction: An analysis of 1683 cases

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About