Cargando…
Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping
BACKGROUND: Fifth-generation, round, form-stable implants have a higher cohesive gel, a higher fill volume, and distinct anterior and posterior profiles. Due to these implant features, anterior-posterior (AP) flipping of round, form-stable implants is discernible, but little is known of this complic...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7787287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33425624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003321 |
_version_ | 1783632794035945472 |
---|---|
author | Jong, Justin Gabriel, Allen Trekell, Melissa Lawser, Amy S. Heidel, Eric Buchanan, Dallas Chun, Joseph T. |
author_facet | Jong, Justin Gabriel, Allen Trekell, Melissa Lawser, Amy S. Heidel, Eric Buchanan, Dallas Chun, Joseph T. |
author_sort | Jong, Justin |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Fifth-generation, round, form-stable implants have a higher cohesive gel, a higher fill volume, and distinct anterior and posterior profiles. Due to these implant features, anterior-posterior (AP) flipping of round, form-stable implants is discernible, but little is known of this complication of implant reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by direct-to-implant reconstruction with round, cohesive, smooth implants were included in this retrospective study. Implants were placed submuscularly or prepectorally. Incidence of flipping was retrieved from patient records. Patients were stratified by presence or absence of flipping; data on patient demographic characteristics, neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment, mastectomy characteristics, and acellular dermal matrix (ADM) type (AlloDerm or FlexHD) and coverage technique (inferior pole, tenting, or wrapping) were compared between the groups to identify risk factors associated with flipping. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (230 breasts) were evaluated. Sixteen cases of implant flipping were documented for a flip rate of 7.0%, all occurring in patients with prepectoral implants. On univariate analysis, prepectoral implant placement, highly cohesive implants, use of AlloDerm, and ADM wrapping/tenting were found to be significantly associated with AP flipping. On logistic regression analyses, ADM type and ADM coverage technique were no longer significant predictors of AP flipping. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo prepectoral implant reconstruction with highly cohesive round implants appear to be at an increased risk of AP flipping. Subpectoral reconstruction is not associated with AP flipping. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7787287 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-77872872021-01-07 Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping Jong, Justin Gabriel, Allen Trekell, Melissa Lawser, Amy S. Heidel, Eric Buchanan, Dallas Chun, Joseph T. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Breast BACKGROUND: Fifth-generation, round, form-stable implants have a higher cohesive gel, a higher fill volume, and distinct anterior and posterior profiles. Due to these implant features, anterior-posterior (AP) flipping of round, form-stable implants is discernible, but little is known of this complication of implant reconstruction. METHODS: Patients who underwent skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by direct-to-implant reconstruction with round, cohesive, smooth implants were included in this retrospective study. Implants were placed submuscularly or prepectorally. Incidence of flipping was retrieved from patient records. Patients were stratified by presence or absence of flipping; data on patient demographic characteristics, neoadjuvant/adjuvant treatment, mastectomy characteristics, and acellular dermal matrix (ADM) type (AlloDerm or FlexHD) and coverage technique (inferior pole, tenting, or wrapping) were compared between the groups to identify risk factors associated with flipping. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients (230 breasts) were evaluated. Sixteen cases of implant flipping were documented for a flip rate of 7.0%, all occurring in patients with prepectoral implants. On univariate analysis, prepectoral implant placement, highly cohesive implants, use of AlloDerm, and ADM wrapping/tenting were found to be significantly associated with AP flipping. On logistic regression analyses, ADM type and ADM coverage technique were no longer significant predictors of AP flipping. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who undergo prepectoral implant reconstruction with highly cohesive round implants appear to be at an increased risk of AP flipping. Subpectoral reconstruction is not associated with AP flipping. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2020-12-22 /pmc/articles/PMC7787287/ /pubmed/33425624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003321 Text en Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of The American Society of Plastic Surgeons. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND) (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) , where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. |
spellingShingle | Breast Jong, Justin Gabriel, Allen Trekell, Melissa Lawser, Amy S. Heidel, Eric Buchanan, Dallas Chun, Joseph T. Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title | Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title_full | Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title_fullStr | Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title_full_unstemmed | Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title_short | Cohesive Round Implants and the Risk of Implant Flipping |
title_sort | cohesive round implants and the risk of implant flipping |
topic | Breast |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7787287/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33425624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/GOX.0000000000003321 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT jongjustin cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT gabrielallen cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT trekellmelissa cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT lawseramys cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT heideleric cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT buchanandallas cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping AT chunjosepht cohesiveroundimplantsandtheriskofimplantflipping |