Search

Background: Mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN) is a common complication following mastectomy that causes significant distress to patients and physicians and also compromises oncologic, surgical, and quality-of-life outcomes., Objectives: We sought to investigate the long-term outcomes of MSFN following implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and determine the rates and predictors of post-MSFN complications., Methods: This was a 20-year analysis of consecutive adult (>18 years) patients who developed MSFN following mastectomy and IBR from January 2001 to January 2021. Multivariable analyses were performed to identify factors associated with post-MSFN complications., Results: We identified 148 reconstructions, with a mean follow-up time of 86.6 ± 52.9 months. The mean time from reconstruction to MSFN was 13.3 ± 10.4 days, and most cases (n = 84, 56.8%) were full-thickness injuries. Most cases (63.5%) were severe, 14.9% were moderate, and 21.6% were mild. Forty-six percent (n = 68) developed a breast-related complication, with infection being the most common (24%). An independent predictor of overall complications was longer time from reconstruction to MSFN (odds ratio [OR], 1.66; P = .040). Aging was an independent predictor of overall complications (OR, 1.86; P = .038); infection (OR, 1.72; P = .005); and dehiscence (OR, 6.18; P = .037). Independent predictors of dehiscence were longer interval from reconstruction to MSFN (OR, 3.23; P = .018) and larger expander/implant size (OR, 1.49; P = .024). Independent predictors of explantation were larger expander/implant size (OR, 1.20; P = .006) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (OR, 5.61; P = .005)., Conclusions: MSFN is associated with high risk of complications following IBR. Awareness of the timing and severity of MSFN and the predictors of post-MSFN complications is crucial for guiding evidence-based decision-making and improving outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Aesthetic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The impact of obesity on outcomes of prepectoral vs subpectoral implant-based reconstruction (IBR) is not well-established., Objectives: The goal of this study was to assess the surgical and patient-reported outcomes of prepectoral vs subpectoral IBR. The authors hypothesized that obese patients would have similar outcomes regardless of device plane., Methods: We conducted a retrospective review of obese patients who underwent 2-stage IBR from January 2017 to December 2019. The primary endpoint was the occurrence of any breast-related complication; the secondary endpoint was device explantation., Results: The authors identified a total of 284 reconstructions (184 prepectoral, 100 subpectoral) in 209 patients. Subpectoral reconstruction demonstrated higher rates of overall complications (50% vs 37%, P = .047) and device explantation (25% vs 12.5%, P = .008) than prepectoral reconstruction. In multivariable regression, subpectoral reconstruction was associated with higher risk of infection (hazard ratio [HR], 1.65; P = .022) and device explantation (HR, 1.97; P = .034). Subgroup analyses demonstrated significantly higher rates of complications and explantation in the subpectoral group in those with a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 and BMI ≥40. The authors found no significant differences in mean scores for satisfaction with the breast (41.57 ± 13.19 vs 45.50 ± 11.91, P = .469), psychosocial well-being (39.43 ± 11.23 vs 39.30 ± 12.49, P = .915), and sexual well-being (17.17 ± 7.83 vs 17.0 ± 9.03, P = .931) between subpectoral and prepectoral reconstruction., Conclusions: Prepectoral reconstruction was associated with significantly decreased overall complications, infections, and device explantation in obese patients compared with subpectoral reconstruction. Prepectoral reconstruction provides superior outcomes to subpectoral reconstruction with comparable patient-reported outcomes., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The Aesthetic Society. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: With the increased use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in breast reconstruction, the number of available materials has increased. There is a relative paucity of high-quality outcomes data for use of different ADMs., Objectives: The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes between a human (HADM) and a bovine ADM (BADM) in implant-based breast reconstruction., Methods: A prospective, single-blinded, randomized controlled trial was conducted to evaluate differences in outcomes between HADM and BADM for patients undergoing immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction. Patients with prior radiation to the index breast were excluded. Patient and surgical characteristics were collected and analyzed., Results: From April 2011 to June 2016, a total of 90 patients were randomized to a mesh group, with 68 patients (HADM, 36 patients/55 breasts; BADM, 32 patients/48 breasts) included in the final analysis. Baseline characteristics were similar between the 2 groups. No significant differences in overall complication rates were identified between HADM (n = 14, 25%) and BADM (n = 13, 27%) (P = 0.85). Similar trends were identified for major complications and complications requiring reoperation. Tissue expander loss was identified in 7% of HADM patients (n = 4) and 17% of BADM patients (n = 8) (P = 0.14)., Conclusions: Similar complication and implant loss rates were found among patients undergoing immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction with HADM or BADM. Regardless of what material is used, careful patient selection and counseling, and cost consideration, help to improve outcomes and sustainability in immediate breast reconstruction., (© 2021 The Aesthetic Society. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: The use of autologous fat grafting (AFG) is becoming increasingly common as an adjunct to breast reconstruction. However, there is a paucity of data comparing the varying processing devices., Objectives: The goal of this study was to compare the outcomes of 2 commercially available AFG processing devices., Methods: A retrospective review was conducted of patients who underwent AFG with dual-filter (Puregraft) or single-filter (Revolve) processing systems between 2016 and 2019. Propensity score matching was utilized to adjust for confounding. A total of 38 breasts from the Puregraft group were matched with 38 breasts from the Revolve group., Results: Matching was successful in achieving a similar distribution of baseline characteristics between the 2 groups. The mean number of AFG sessions was comparable between the 2 groups (P = 0.37) with a similar median total volume (Puregraft, 159 mL vs Revolve, 130 mL; P = 0.23). Complication rates were similar between the 2 devices (Puregraft, 26%; Revolve, 18%; P = 0.47). Patients with at least 1 complication had higher overall AFG volume (median, 200 mL vs 130 mL; P = 0.03) and number of sessions (mean, 2.4 vs 1.8, P = 0.009) compared with those without any postoperative complication., Conclusions: Overall complication rates were comparable between 2 commonly used, commercially available AFG processing systems, and therefore the choice of which to use should be based on surgeon preference. Future studies are underway to decipher whether either system offers superior graft retention, cosmetic, or patient-reported outcomes., (© 2021 The Aesthetic Society. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Autologous fat grafting (AFG) serves as an effective method to address volume defects, contour irregularities, and asymmetry in both aesthetic and reconstructive procedures. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the potential of cancer recurrence and interference with cancer surveillance in oncologic patients receiving AFG. The adipose tissue contains adipose-derived stem cells (ASCs), a specific type of mesenchymal stem cells, that facilitate secretion of numerous growth factors which in turn stimulate tissue regeneration and angiogenesis. As such, it has been theorized that ASCs may also have the potential to stimulate cancer cell proliferation and growth when used in oncologic patients. Multiple research studies have demonstrated the ability of ACSs to facilitate tumor proliferation in animal models. However, clinical research in oncologic patients has yielded contradictory findings. Although the literature pertaining to oncologic safety in head and neck, as well as sarcoma, cancer patients remains limited, studies demonstrate no increased risk of tumor recurrence in these patient populations receiving AFG. Similarly, both the efficacy and safety of AFG have been well established in breast cancer patients through numerous clinical studies. More recently, preclinical research in animal models has shown that AFG has the potential to facilitate tissue regeneration and improve joint contracture following irradiation. Ultimately, further research is needed to elucidate the safety of AFG in a variety of oncologic patients, as well as explore its use in tissue regeneration, particularly in the setting of radiotherapy. Level of Evidence: 4., (© 2021 The Aesthetic Society. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an uncommon type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma occurring in the fluid or capsule adjacent to textured breast implants. Diagnosis of BIA-ALCL of symptomatic patients requires demonstration of large anaplastic cells with uniform expression of CD30 protein on immunohistochemistry., Objectives: The authors investigated a novel, rapid, office-based, and economic in-situ enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for screening BIA-ALCL patients., Methods: A commercially available in-situ ELISA was standardized and validated for patients with confirmed BIA-ALCL diagnosis with clinical isolates. A panel of 9 pathologically confirmed BIA-ALCL patients was screened by serum, plasma, and periprosthetic effusion specimens and compared against serum, plasma, and nonneoplastic delayed seromas in 7 control patients. Statistical analysis demonstrated assay consistency and reliability., Results: All BIA-ALCL effusions demonstrated CD30 ELISA detection at full and all serial concentrations. BIA-ALCL serum specimens and all control specimens were negative at full concentration and serial dilutions (1:100, 1:250, 1:500, and 1:1000). BIA-ALCL plasma specimens were weakly positive at full concentration and revealed no activity with serial dilution., Conclusions: This is the first study to demonstrate a viable alternative to CD30 immunohistochemistry for the screening of BIA-ALCL. Our study demonstrates 100% sensitivity in seroma fluid with no detectable CD30 in benign seroma samples. A CD30 ELISA represents a novel, low-cost screening test, which may be used to screen suspicious aspirations of delayed periprosthetic fluid collections in an office-based setting., (© 2019 The Aesthetic Society. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an uncommon T-cell lymphoma associated with textured-surface breast implants. Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) polymorphisms have been described with other forms of lymphoma, but have not been described for BIA-ALCL., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate HLA polymorphisms in BIA-ALCL patients., Methods: We prospectively evaluated HLA alleles in patients with BIA-ALCL. HLA was analyzed by probe-based sequence-specific testing and sequence-based typing. The frequencies of HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-C, HLA-DRB1, and HLA-DQB1 alleles were evaluated. Allele frequencies in the Caucasian European general population were obtained from the National Marrow Donor Program to serve as normative controls. We estimated the relative risk of BIA-ALCL with 95% confidence intervals from a t test., Results: Thirteen patients who had undergone BIA-ALCL and HLA testing were identified from 2017 to 2018. Patients carried 10, 11, and 9 HLA-A, HLA-B, and HLA-C alleles, respectively. There were 8 DRB1 alleles and 5 DQB1 alleles in the BIA-ALCL patients. The A*26 allele occurred significantly more frequently in the general population compared with BIA-ALCL patients (0.2992 vs 0.07692, P < 0.001)., Conclusions: Our results identify a difference between HLA A*26 in patients who develop BIA-ALCL and the general population, and may signify genetic susceptibility factors responsible for germline genetic variation in HLA in patients with BIA-ALCL. Further work is needed to elucidate if these alleles are predictive for BIA-ALCL in women with textured-surface breast implants.Level of Evidence: 4., (© 2019 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Autologous fat grafting (AFG) is increasing in popularity to address a variety of defects. There is interest in developing techniques to harvest, process, and inject fat to improve clinical outcomes as well as operative efficiency., Objectives: The purpose of this pilot study is to compare the rate of graft processing of two commercially available systems for graft preparation., Methods: Twenty consecutive cases using an active filtration system (system-AF) were observed followed by 20 consecutive cases using a passive filtration system (system-PF) to compare efficiency rate. Fat processing rate was quantified in milliliters/minute., Results: Forty patients underwent AFG with no differences in patient characteristics between the groups. There was 1 incidence of palpable fat necrosis per group (5%). For all patients, this was the first fat grafting procedure; 20% of patients (n = 4 per group) had additional fat grafting. Overall, the rate of adipose tissue preparation was significantly higher with system-AF compared to system-PF (19.8 mL/min vs 5.3 mL/min, P ≤ 0.001). The resulting percent of graftable fat was comparable (AF: 41% vs PF: 42%; P = 0.83)., Conclusions: Time and motion studies such as this provide a means to systematically document each of the steps involved in fat grafting in a reliable fashion. The authors demonstrate a significantly higher rate of lipoaspirate processing using an active filtration system compared to a passive system. Further large-scale studies of the efficacy and cost analysis of AFG are a necessary component of determining best practices in the field., (© 2018 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Despite increasing literature support for the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in expander-based breast reconstruction, the effect of ADM on clinical outcomes in the presence of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has not been well described., Objectives: To analyze the impact ADM plays on clinical outcomes on immediate tissue expander (ITE) reconstruction undergoing PMRT., Methods: We retrospectively reviewed patients who underwent ITE breast reconstruction from 2004 to 2014 at MD Anderson Cancer Center. Patients were categorized into four cohorts: ADM, ADM with PMRT, non-ADM, and non-ADM with PMRT. Outcomes and complications were compared among cohorts., Results: Over 10 years, 957 patients underwent ITE reconstruction (683 non-ADM, 113 non-ADM with PMRT, 486 ADM, and 88 ADM with PMRT) with 1370 reconstructions. Overall complication rates for the ADM and non-ADM cohorts were 39.0% and 16.7%, respectively (P < 0.001). Within both cohorts, mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN) was the most common complication, followed by infection. ADM use was associated with a significantly higher rate of infections and seromas in both radiated and non-radiated groups; however, when comparing radiated cohorts, the incidence of explantation was significantly lower with the use of ADM., Conclusions: The decision to use ADM for expander-based breast reconstruction should be performed with caution, given higher overall rates of complications, including infections and seromas. There may, however, be a role for ADM in cases requiring PMRT, as the overall incidence of implant failure is lower than non-ADM cases., (© 2018 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.)