• Main page
• About the journal
• Editorial board
• Subscription
• Information for contributors
• Editorial and Peer Review
• Issues archive
• Authors
• Articles
  • By alphabet
  • By category
• Blogs and comments

The journal is included into The list of leading scientific periodicals.

The journal is included into VINITI database and is registered in Electronic scientific library.

The journal is indexed by SCOPUS, Ulrich's International Periodicals Directory.

EBSCO

https://doi.org/10.14300/mnnc.2024.19068

Analysis of complications of non-flapped breast reconstructions after mastectomy for cancer

[Surgery]
Samvel Vladimirovich Petrosyants; Arthur Aidemirov; Denis Nikolaevich Rovenskikh; Sergey Petrovich Shevchenko; Oksana Vladimirova; Sidorov Sergei; Dmitry Vladimirovich Ivanov;

Studied the structure of complications in non-flapped breast reconstructions after mastectomy for cancer. The study included 90 patients (average age is 49±7 years), divided into three groups depending on the method of oncological and reconstructive surgery. The effectiveness of retro- and two types of prepectoral breast reconstructions is considered – with tissue expansion, lipofilling and subsequent replacement with a silicone breast implant, as well as the operation proposed by the authors using a polypropylene mesh implant and a silicone breast implant coated with foamed polyurethane. Complications are analyzed. Results: complications in the form of malposition, extrusion and animatic deformation have not been recorded in the case of the method proposed by the authors. The minimal incidence of capsular contracture has been revealed. Conclusions: The variant of simultaneous prepectoral reconstruction developed by the authors demonstrates a significant reduction in the risk of development of malposition, extrusion of silicone endoprostheses, animatic deformation and capsule contracture.

Download

References:
1. Fortunato L., Loreti A., Cortese G., Spallone D., Toto V. [et al.]. Regret and quality of life after mastectomy with or without reconstruction. Clin. Вreast Сancer. 2021;21(3):162-169. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2019.11.005
2. Caplin D. A., Calobrace M. B., Wixtrom R. N., Estes M. M., Canady J. W. MemoryGel Breast Implants: final safety and efficacy results after 10 years of follow-up. Plast. Reconstruct. Surg. 2021;147(3):556-566. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000007635
3. Loreti A., Siri G., De Carli M., Fanelli B., Arelli F. [et al.]. Immediate Breast Reconstruction after mastectomy with polyurethane implants versus textured implants: A retrospective study with focus on capsular contracture. Breast Edinburgh (Scotland). 2020;54:127-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2020.09.009
4. Acea Nebril B., García Novoa A., García Jiménez L., Díaz Carballada C., Bouzón Alejandro A. [et al.]. Immediate breast reconstruction by prepectoral polyurethane implant: Preliminary results of the prospective study PreQ-20. Cirugia Esp. (Engl. Ed.). 2023;101(3):187-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cireng.2022.09.021
5. Lo Torto F., Relucenti M., Familiari G., Vaia N., Casella D. [et al.]. The effect of postmastectomy radiation therapy on breast implants: material analysis on silicone and polyurethane prosthesis. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2018;81(2):228-234. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000001461
6. Hong H. K., Kim Y. H., Lee J. S., Lee J., Park H. Y. [et al.]. Prepectoral breast reconstruction with complete anterior implant coverage using a single, large, square-shaped acellular dermal matrix. BMC Surg. 2022;22(1):234. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12893-022-01683-z
7. Nguyen-Sträuli B. D., Vorburger D., Frauchiger-Heuer H., Bringolf L., Maggi N. [et al.]. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with TiLOOP® Bra Pocket – a single-centre retrospective study. J. Plast. Reconst. Aesth. Surg. (JPRAS). 2022;75(1):104-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2021.08.027
8. Gao P., Wang X., Bai P., Kong X., Wang Z. [et al.]. Clinical outcomes and patient satisfaction with the use of biological and synthetic meshes in one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction. Breast Cancer (Tokyo, Japan). 2022;29(3):450-457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-021-01324-y
9. Poveromo L. P., Franck P., Ellison A., Janhofer D. E., Asadourian P. A. [et al.]. Prepectoral breast reconstruction without the use of acellular dermal matrix: a 3-year review. Ann. Plast. Surg. 2022;88(3):205-208. https://doi.org/10.1097/SAP.0000000000003188
10. King C. A., Masanam M. K., Tousimis E. A., Salzberg C. A. Literature review and guide for optimal position in implant based breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 2023;12(8):1082-1093. https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-23-78
11. Fracol M., Qiu C. S., Chiu W. K., Feld L. N., Shah N. [et al.]. Lateral and inferior implant malposition in prosthetic breast reconstruction: incidence and risk factors. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. PRS-Global Open. 2020;8(5):27-52. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000002752
12. Goddard N. V., Pacifico M. D., Campiglio G., Waterhou- se N. A novel application of the hemostatic net in aesthetic breast surgery: a preliminary report. Aesth. Surg. J. 2022;42(11):632-644. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjac058
13. Calobrace M. B., Mays C., Wilson R., Wermeling R. Popcorn capsulorrhaphy in revision aesthetic breast surgery. Aesth. Surg. J. 2020;40(1):63-74. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjy324
14. Shikhman A., Erz L., Brown M., Wagner D. Prepectoral conversion of subpectoral implants for animation deformity after breast reconstruction: technique and experience. Plastic and reconstructive surgery. PRS-Global Open. 2022;10(2):4132. https://doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000004132
15. Cerceo J. R., Cai L., Yesantharao P., Thornton B., Nazerali R. Risk stratification in subpectoral to prepectoral pocket conversion to reduce post-reconstruction animation deformity. J. Plast. Reconstruct. Aesthet. Surg. (JPRAS). 2023;77:253-261. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bjps.2022.11.014
16. Dyrberg D. L., Bille C., Koudahl V., Gerke O., Sørensen J. A. [et al.]. Evaluation of breast animation deformity following pre- and subpectoral direct-to-Implant breast reconstruction: a randomized controlled trial. Arch. Plast. Surg. 2022;49(5):587-595. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0042-1756337
17. Goodreau A. M., Driscoll C. R., Nye A., Nigro L. C., Blanchet N. P. Revising prepectoral breast reconstruction. Plast. Reconstruct. Surg. 2022;149(3):579-584. https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000008850
18. Weinzierl A., Schmauss D., Brucato D., Harder Y. Implant based breast reconstruction after mastectomy, from the subpectoral to the prepectoral approach: An evidence-based change of mind? J. Clin. Med. 2022;11(11):3079. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm11113079
19. Catanuto G., Virzì D., Latino M., Musmeci N., Fichera D. [et al.]. One-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with polyurethane-coated device: standardized assessment of outcomes. Aesth. Surg. J. https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjad301
20. De Vita R., Buccheri E. M., Villanucci A., Pozzi M. Breast reconstruction actualized in nipple-sparing mastectomy and direct-to-implant, prepectoral polyurethane positioning: early experience and preliminary results. Clin. Breast Cancer. 2019;19(2):e358-e363. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2018.12.015

Keywords: breast cancer, breast reconstruction, capsular contracture, animation deformity, silicone breast implant, radiation therapy, mesh implant