Cargando…

Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction

The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific impl...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Schoberleitner, Ines, Augustin, Angela, Egle, Daniel, Brunner, Christine, Amort, Birgit, Zelger, Bettina, Brunner, Andrea, Wolfram, Dolores
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9967160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36835850
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041315
_version_ 1784897195842994176
author Schoberleitner, Ines
Augustin, Angela
Egle, Daniel
Brunner, Christine
Amort, Birgit
Zelger, Bettina
Brunner, Andrea
Wolfram, Dolores
author_facet Schoberleitner, Ines
Augustin, Angela
Egle, Daniel
Brunner, Christine
Amort, Birgit
Zelger, Bettina
Brunner, Andrea
Wolfram, Dolores
author_sort Schoberleitner, Ines
collection PubMed
description The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific implant topographies. Of note, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has only been observed in response to textured surface implants. We hypothesize that reduction of SMI surface roughness causes less host response and, hence, better cosmetic outcomes with fewer complications for the patient. A total of 7 patients received the routinely used CPX(®)4 breast expander (~60 µM Ra) and the novel SmoothSilk(®) (~4 µM Ra), fixed prepectoral with a titanized mesh pocket and randomized to the left or right breast after bilateral prophylactic NSME (nipple-sparing mastectomy). We aimed to compare the postoperative outcome regarding capsule thickness, seroma formation, rippling, implant dislocation as well as comfortability and practicability. Our analysis shows that surface roughness is an influential parameter in controlling fibrotic implant encapsulation. Compared intra-individually for the first time in patients, our data confirm an improved biocompatibility with minor capsule formation around SmoothSilk(®) implants with an average shell roughness of 4 µM and in addition an amplification of host response by titanized implant pockets.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9967160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-99671602023-02-26 Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction Schoberleitner, Ines Augustin, Angela Egle, Daniel Brunner, Christine Amort, Birgit Zelger, Bettina Brunner, Andrea Wolfram, Dolores J Clin Med Article The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific implant topographies. Of note, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has only been observed in response to textured surface implants. We hypothesize that reduction of SMI surface roughness causes less host response and, hence, better cosmetic outcomes with fewer complications for the patient. A total of 7 patients received the routinely used CPX(®)4 breast expander (~60 µM Ra) and the novel SmoothSilk(®) (~4 µM Ra), fixed prepectoral with a titanized mesh pocket and randomized to the left or right breast after bilateral prophylactic NSME (nipple-sparing mastectomy). We aimed to compare the postoperative outcome regarding capsule thickness, seroma formation, rippling, implant dislocation as well as comfortability and practicability. Our analysis shows that surface roughness is an influential parameter in controlling fibrotic implant encapsulation. Compared intra-individually for the first time in patients, our data confirm an improved biocompatibility with minor capsule formation around SmoothSilk(®) implants with an average shell roughness of 4 µM and in addition an amplification of host response by titanized implant pockets. MDPI 2023-02-07 /pmc/articles/PMC9967160/ /pubmed/36835850 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041315 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Schoberleitner, Ines
Augustin, Angela
Egle, Daniel
Brunner, Christine
Amort, Birgit
Zelger, Bettina
Brunner, Andrea
Wolfram, Dolores
Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title_full Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title_fullStr Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title_full_unstemmed Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title_short Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction
title_sort is it all about surface topography? an intra-individual clinical outcome analysis of two different implant surfaces in breast reconstruction
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9967160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36835850
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/jcm12041315
work_keys_str_mv AT schoberleitnerines isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT augustinangela isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT egledaniel isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT brunnerchristine isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT amortbirgit isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT zelgerbettina isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT brunnerandrea isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction
AT wolframdolores isitallaboutsurfacetopographyanintraindividualclinicaloutcomeanalysisoftwodifferentimplantsurfacesinbreastreconstruction