Background: Problems with implant-based breast reconstructions can lead to patient dissatisfaction and a request for total autologous reconstruction. This 12-year study aimed to determine the rate of conversion from implant-based to autologous reconstruction, to identify potential risk factors, compare the rate of conversion in implant-only and latissimus dorsi/implant reconstructions, and assess patient satisfaction following conversion.
Methods: Implant-based reconstructions performed between 2000 and 2008 were reviewed. The cohort was then followed prospectively until 2012.
Results: One hundred thirty-nine implant-based reconstructions were performed in 118 patients. Sixty-nine patients underwent latissimus dorsi/implant (80 breasts) and 49 underwent implant-only reconstructions (59 breasts). Twenty-one underwent bilateral reconstructions following risk-reduction surgery. Sixteen percent (19 of 118) of patients and 14 percent of breasts (19 of 139) underwent conversion to autologous tissue. None of the 21 bilateral cases converted (hazard ratio, 4.6; p < 0.05). Median time to conversion was 64 months (range, 18 to 142 months). The main motivating factors for conversion included poor aesthetic result (36.8 percent), capsular contracture (31.6 percent), change in weight (21.1 percent), and implant infection/extrusion (10.5 percent). Implant-only reconstructions were more likely to convert (hazard ratio, 3.6; p < 0.05) and at an earlier stage (p < 0.05) than latissimus dorsi/implant reconstructions. Neither radiotherapy (p = 0.68) nor capsular contracture (p = 0.94) significantly increased the risk of conversion. The BREAST-Q demonstrated high patient satisfaction after conversion.
Conclusions: Autologous tissue conversion offers a definitive means of improving the quality of the result, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in troublesome implant-based breast reconstructions. Latissimus dorsi coverage of implants and bilateral reconstructions appear to be protective.
Clinical Question/level Of Evidence: Risk, III.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0b013e318290f83e | DOI Listing |
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
December 2024
Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University, Stanford, CA, United States.
Background: Poland syndrome (PS) is a congenital abnormality defined as aplasia or hypoplasia of the unilateral pectoralis muscle and breast tissue that may be accompanied by limb or thoracic deformities. Reconstruction of deformities associated with PS is challenging owing to the spectrum of differences. We aimed to evaluate the trends in surgical management of chest and breast anatomical anomalies associated with PS.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFAnn Chir Plast Esthet
December 2024
Service de chirurgie plastique reconstructrice et esthétique, centre de traitement des brûlés, hôpital Saint-Louis, Assistance publique-Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP), université de Paris-Cité, 1, avenue Claude-Vellefaux, 75010 Paris, France. Electronic address:
Background And Objectives: Sensibility of the breast area is a key factor in quality-of-life evaluation after breast reconstruction (BR). Breast sensation can be assessed using numerous tools that are already largely described in the literature, including the Semmes Weinstein filaments which remain the most frequently used. Although different reconstruction techniques are available, post-BR sensitivity is rarely described.
View Article and Find Full Text PDFJBJS Essent Surg Tech
December 2024
Department of Orthopedics, OhioHealth Health System, Columbus, Ohio.
Pol Przegl Chir
April 2024
General and Oncological Surgery Clinic, Karol Marcinkowski University Hospital, Zielona Gora, Poland, University Department of Surgery and Oncology, Collegium Medicum, University of Zielona Gora, Poland.
Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med
January 2025
Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of California San Francisco, 500 Parnassus Ave MU-320W, San Francisco, CA, 94143-0728, USA.
Purpose Of The Review: Anatomic and reverse endoprosthetic reconstruction are two common surgical options used after tumor resection of the proximal humerus. The purpose of this article is to provide an overview of the functional outcomes and complications of modern anatomic and reverse endoprostheses.
Recent Findings: The anatomic endoprosthesis has traditionally been a successful reconstructive technique as it provided a stable platform upon which the hand and elbow could function.
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!