The Role of Lipofilling After Breast Reconstruction: Evaluation of Outcomes and Patient Satisfaction with BREAST-Q

Abstract

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Mammary lipofiling seen to the hospital complex of Dax

“…4 In our series, the peak of frequency is between 49 -54 years with médian age of 52 years (37 à73 years) while it is of 41 years in the study of Cogliandro and of 54±13 years old for Mundy LR in 2017 for the women who benefited from the lipofilling in mammary reconstruction after surgery for cancer of sein. [5][6] The surgery that it is radical or conservative takes an important place in the treatment of breast cancer and she can go of a tumorectomy simple to one mastectomie. 7 In our series, we practiced 33 complete mastectomies (94.28%) which all benefited from a reconstruction which 29 (82.86%) is immediate and 6 (17.14%) are secondary.…”

“…3 But whatever is adopted technology, three layers are got: floating him with adipocytes abimés to be eliminated, the low part of contents which contains blood products and rubbish hématiques to eliminate also and finally the medium part containing useful grease. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15] The volume of grease to be taken and re-injected is also a subject of controversy but it depends especially on the volume of the mammary defect to fill up, the volume of packaging and indication: exclusive or supplementary. In our study, the lipofilling was used as a supplement to mammary reconstruction at 33 patients (94.28%) and in exclusive in 2 cases (5.72%).…”

“…3,10 Towards the end of 1980s, Bricoll and al offered the use of the fatty transfers in the breast, but the publications launched very virulent reactions of opposition because they thought that the injections of grease in the breast could procreate microcalcifications and cysts that can bother the detection of cancers and in 1987, the American ASPRS society declared itself disadvantageous to the use of the fatty transfer in the breast, then studies were led entraining a progressive lifting of debate. [3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10]23 Currently, many studies bring back the security of this technology. Debald M and al did not find recurrence among the effects of the lipofilling in their studies published in 2017.…”

“…This situation is identical to those published where the authors bring back high rates of "very satisfied" and "satisfied" women on aesthetic and psychological plan after the reconstruction of their breast by lipofilling. 13,19,30 These "satisfied" women tell they have a flexible «breast and of natural consistency» and significant benefits at the level of the zones of sample authors could nevertheless record 4 cases (11.43%) of dissatisfaction in comparison with the aspect of their breast, 3 (8.57%) women not satisfied in comparison with waiting's but it is patients who were only in their first session. Two (5.72%) women have to leave because of pain, 4 patients could not confirm the impact of reconstruction on sexual activity.…”

Long-term impact of lipofilling in hybrid breast reconstruction: retrospective analysis of two cohorts

“…Patients were asked to fill in the postoperative BREAST-Q reconstruction questionnaire [30][31][32] to evaluate the outcomes. The BREAST-Q reconstruction module has the following scales: satisfaction with breasts, satisfaction with implants, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, physical well-being.…”