Cargando…

Subcutaneous Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Surgical, Functional, and Aesthetic Results after Long-Term Follow-Up

BACKGROUND: Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction can be achieved more easily by means of soft-tissue replacement devices such as dermal matrices and synthetic meshes. The feasibility of a subcutaneous approach has been recently investigated by some studies with different devices functioning as im...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bernini, Marco, Calabrese, Claudio, Cecconi, Lorenzo, Santi, Caterina, Gjondedaj, Ulpjana, Roselli, Jenny, Nori, Jacopo, Fausto, Alfonso, Orzalesi, Lorenzo, Casella, Donato
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer Health 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4727683/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26893999
http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000000533
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction can be achieved more easily by means of soft-tissue replacement devices such as dermal matrices and synthetic meshes. The feasibility of a subcutaneous approach has been recently investigated by some studies with different devices functioning as implant support. Aim of this study is to analyze the long-term results, both objective and subjective, of a previous nonrandomized trial comparing prepectoral (subcutaneous) and retropectoral breast reconstructions. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a nonrandomized prospective trial, comparing the standard retropectoral reconstruction and the prepectoral subcutaneous approach, using a titanium-coated mesh in both techniques, were followed up and evaluated for long-term results. Cases were compared in terms of the causes and rate of reinterventions, of the postoperative BREAST-Q questionnaire results, and of an objective surgical evaluation. RESULTS: The subcutaneous group had a rate of implant failure and removal of 5.1% when compared with 0% in the retropectoral group. Aesthetic outcome was significantly better for the subcutaneous group both at a subjective and at an objective evaluation. Capsular contracture rate was 0% in the subcutaneous group. CONCLUSIONS: A higher rate of implant failure and removal, although not significant, always because of skin flaps and wound problems, should be taken into account for a careful patients selection. The subcutaneous breast reconstruction shows good long-term results. A coherent subjective and objective cosmetic advantage of this approach emerges. Moreover, no capsular contracture is evident, albeit in a relatively limited number of cases.