An Algorithm for the Management of Explantation Surgery

Breast implant reverse surgery: A step-by-step approach

The popularity of breast augmentation has seen a decrease in number in the recent years. Simultaneously, the request for breast implant removal has increased impressively. A total of 77 women undergoing breast implant removal with no exchange were divided into four groups depending on the type of "reverse surgery" following the explantation: simple implant removal, implant removal with lipofilling, implant removal with mastopexy, and implant removal with mastopexy and lipofilling. Following this, an algorithm was created to standardize the ideal "reverse" surgery. After surgery, all the patients were followed for at least 6 months to understand their level of satisfaction regarding the outcome of the surgery. The majority of patients were highly satisfied after explantation. Implant-related issues were found to be the main cause for explantation surgery. Capsulectomy was performed in the minority of cases, as the capsule was found to be an ideal layer for fat grafting. Grouping the patients into 4 categories allowed us to investigate a pattern behind the decision to undergo a certain type of secondary procedure and to create an algorithm with general rules that can be used as a guide for surgeons. The increased demand for this type of surgery underlines a new interesting trend in plastic surgery that, together with Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma advent, will probably have implications on the communication between surgeons and patients and most likely on the choice of choosing different ways of breast volume augmentation.

Clinical Implications and Management of Non-BIA-ALCL Breast Implant Capsular Pathology

SUMMARY

The breast implant capsule is a dynamic structure that forms following the implantation of a device. Although normally benign, increased awareness of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) highlights that disease may arise from the capsule. BIA-ALCL presents as a late seroma or mass but explains few of the late seromas found in breast implant patients. To date, many of these seromas lack a clear cause and are often described as "idiopathic." Several benign and malignant breast implant capsular diseases can cause a late seroma or mass, including breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma. Similar to early reports of BIA-ALCL, these conditions are rare and largely limited to case reports or series. The purpose of this special topic is to present a narrative review highlighting capsular abnormalities that contribute to the formation of late seroma or mass in an attempt to broaden the differential diagnosis and help plastic surgeons identify the cause. Specifically, we review the presentation and management of BIA-ALCL, synovial metaplasia, capsular epithelialization, late hematoma, double capsule, breast cancer, squamous cell carcinoma, mesenchymal tumor, and B-cell lymphoma. Although rare, plastic surgeons should consider these capsular conditions as causes of late seromas and masses. Usually, these conditions may be diagnosed by following the National Comprehensive Cancer Network screening guidelines for BIA-ALCL. Thorough evaluation and workup of late seromas and masses may lead to improved characterization of these rare breast implant capsular conditions and improve our understanding of their pathophysiology and management.

Preventing Soft Tissue Complications in Secondary Aesthetic Breast Surgery Using Indocyanin Green Angiography

BACKGROUND

Secondary cosmetic breast surgery after primary augmentation with implant can be associated with an increased risk of adverse events. Partial/complete nipple areolar complex (NAC) necrosis is particularly feared. In this preliminary study, the authors propose the use of Indocyanine Green (ICG) angiography in order to assess the blood supply of breast tissue after implant removal.

OBJECTIVES

The main objective is to prevent skin and gland necrosis in revision breast surgery.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective comparative analysis of 33 patients undergoing secondary breast surgery between 2018 and 2021 by a single surgeon (M.S.). Breast tissue perfusion was assessed in 16 patients by intraoperative ICG-angiography at the end of implant removal and possible capsulectomy. Non-stained/non-fluorescent areas were judged to be low perfusion areas and were excised with short scar mastopexy.

RESULTS

In the ICG-angiography group, 7 patients (44%) showed an area of poor perfusion along the inferior pole, all of these patients underwent subglandular breast augmentation. Resection of the poor perfusion areas allowed an uneventful postoperative course. In the non ICG-angiography group (17 patients), 5 patients experienced vertical scar dehiscence/necrosis. We found a statistically significant association between non-ICG angiography group and vertical scar dehiscence/necrosis, and also between vertical scar dehiscence/necrosis and subglandular implant placement (P-value = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

Safer secondary surgery can be offered to patients undergoing secondary aesthetic breast procedures, especially when the first augmentation surgery is unknown e.g. implant plane, type of pedicle used, the implant is large and subglandular, and capsulectomy is performed.

Breast Implant Illness (BII): Real Syndrome or a Social Media Phenomenon? A Narrative Review of the Literature

Breast implant illness (BII) is a condition characterized by elusive diagnostic criteria and self-reported diverse disabling and distressing physical and psychological symptoms. With currently significant increase in public awareness, BII is perhaps becoming the most controversial subject in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery, generating heated debates between those who do not believe such a condition exists and those who demand its acceptance as a recognized diagnosis. Silicone incompatibility has been associated with "autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants" (ASIA syndrome) or Shoenfeld's syndrome. It is still unclear, however, whether BII symptoms would have occurred if no implants had been placed in the first place. The purpose of this literature review is to analyze critically the current state of scientific evidence related to this condition. Though the psychosomatic theory is most likely, the mechanism of BII symptoms is probably multifactorial. At present, BII being an underlying connective tissue disorder cannot be confirmed; moreover, whether improved aesthetic outcome and patient's overall satisfaction with the profile of their reconstructed or augmented breasts translate into decreased self-reported BII symptoms is still not well elucidated. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Breast Implant Safety: an Overview of Current Regulations and Screening Guidelines

Breast implant surgery for cosmetic or reconstructive purposes is becoming increasingly common. While the devices used are regulated and approved by the US Food and Drug Administration, all patients with breast implants require continued follow-up. Many patients will seek this care from their primary care providers, especially when follow-up with their plastic surgeon is difficult. It is vital that treating clinicians are knowledgeable about the history of breast implants, routine screening guidelines, and the recent breast implant "hot topics"-breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), connective tissue disease, and breast implant illness. This paper will provide the necessary information for primary care providers to appropriately counsel patients with breast implants to maintain not only their trust, but also their health.

Revision Breast Augmentation

Breast augmentation is consistently one of the most commonly performed aesthetic operations every year. Unfortunately, revision rates following primary augmentation remain as high as 36%. There are several causes for revision breast augmentation; however, the most common and challenging of these include capsular contracture, implant malposition, and ptosis of the aging breast following augmentation. Successful management of these problems requires knowledge on how to best treat the implant and capsule with the corresponding soft tissue simultaneously. While surgical management is important, understanding the pathological causes of these entities during the primary operation can reduce the need for revision. This article utilizes the most up-to-date literature to review the appropriate clinical evaluation and surgical management of these complex cases.