1
|
Kim M, Khavanin N, Jiang CZ, Barnett JM, Boe LA, Allen RJ, Stern CS, Mehrara BJ, Nelson JA. Reconstructing Failure: Assessing Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes after Loss of Initial Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2025; 155:649e-659e. [PMID: 39230288 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000011717] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/05/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Breast reconstruction failure, defined as the removal of a prosthetic device or flap without immediate replacement, can be traumatic. The authors describe the progression of tissue expander (TE), implant, or autologous breast reconstructive failure, and assess the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) among patients who undergo additional reconstruction. METHOD Patients undergoing TE, implant, or autologous breast reconstruction between 2017 and 2022 were included, and patients with reconstructive failures were identified. Outcomes of interests included receipt of additional reconstruction and BREAST-Q scores 1 year after reconstructive failure. The authors also performed a propensity-matched analysis between patients who underwent secondary reconstruction and patients who had an uncomplicated reconstruction. RESULTS A total of 4258 patients receiving TEs, 4420 patients receiving implants, and 1545 patients receiving autologous breast reconstruction were included. Of patients who experienced reconstructive failures, 49.5% of patients with TEs, 4.8% of patients with implants, and 53.8% of patients with autologous reconstruction underwent secondary reconstruction. Age, psychiatric diagnosis, chemotherapy, radiation, and mastectomy type were associated with increased likelihood of secondary reconstruction. Between patients with and without additional reconstruction, higher Psychosocial Well-being trended toward the former cohort (61 [interquartile range, 56, 80] versus 50 [46, 65]; P = 0.085). Propensity-matched analysis demonstrated comparable PROs at 1 year after definite reconstruction. CONCLUSIONS Fewer than half of patients with reconstructive failure undergo an additional reconstruction. Patients who receive secondary reconstruction may have greater Psychosocial Well-being scores than those who do not and comparable PROs to those who had uncomplicated initial reconstruction. Surgeons should counsel patients with reconstructive failures that secondary reconstruction, although traumatizing, may be beneficial. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Risk, III.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Minji Kim
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Nima Khavanin
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Charles Z Jiang
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Joshua M Barnett
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Lillian A Boe
- Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
| | - Robert J Allen
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Carrie S Stern
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Babak J Mehrara
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| | - Jonas A Nelson
- From the Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Vinci V, Belgiovine C, Janszen G, Agnelli B, Pellegrino L, Calcaterra F, Cancellara A, Ciceri R, Benedetti A, Cardenas C, Colombo F, Supino D, Lozito A, Caimi E, Monari M, Klinger FM, Riccipetitoni G, Raffaele A, Comoli P, Allavena P, Mavilio D, Di Landro L, Klinger M, Rusconi R. Breast implant surface topography triggers a chronic-like inflammatory response. Life Sci Alliance 2024; 7:e202302132. [PMID: 38383454 PMCID: PMC10881835 DOI: 10.26508/lsa.202302132] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/04/2023] [Revised: 02/12/2024] [Accepted: 02/13/2024] [Indexed: 02/23/2024] Open
Abstract
Breast implants are extensively employed for both reconstructive and esthetic purposes. However, the safety of breast implants with textured surfaces has been questioned, owing to a potential correlation with anaplastic large-cell lymphoma and the recurrence of breast cancer. This study investigates the immune response elicited by different prosthetic surfaces, focusing on the comparison between macrotextured and microtextured breast implants. Through the analysis of intraoperatively harvested periprosthetic fluids and cell culture experiments on surface replicas, we demonstrate that macrotextured surfaces elicit a more pronounced chronic-like activation of leucocytes and an increased release of inflammatory cytokines, in contrast to microtextured surfaces. In addition, in vitro fluorescent imaging of leucocytes revealed an accumulation of lymphocytes within the cavities of the macrotextured surfaces, indicating that the physical entrapment of these cells may contribute to their activation. These findings suggest that the topography of implant surfaces plays a significant role in promoting a chronic-like inflammatory environment, which could be a contributing factor in the development of lymphomas associated with a wide range of implantable devices.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Valeriano Vinci
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Cristina Belgiovine
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostics and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
| | - Gerardus Janszen
- Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Benedetta Agnelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Luca Pellegrino
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Francesca Calcaterra
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Medical Biotechnologies and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Assunta Cancellara
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Medical Biotechnologies and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberta Ciceri
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Medical Biotechnologies and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Alessandra Benedetti
- Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Alessia Lozito
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Edoardo Caimi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Marta Monari
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
| | | | - Giovanna Riccipetitoni
- Department of Clinical, Surgical, Diagnostics and Pediatric Sciences, University of Pavia, Pavia, Italy
- Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
| | | | | | - Paola Allavena
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| | - Domenico Mavilio
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Medical Biotechnologies and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Luca Di Landro
- Department of Aerospace Science and Technology, Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Klinger
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Medical Biotechnologies and Translational Medicine, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Rusconi
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Italy
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Santanelli di Pompeo F, Clemens MW, Paolini G, Firmani G, Panagiotakos D, Sorotos M. Epidemiology of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in the United States: A Systematic Review. Aesthet Surg J 2023; 44:NP32-NP40. [PMID: 37616552 DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjad279] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2023] [Revised: 08/15/2023] [Accepted: 08/23/2023] [Indexed: 08/26/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Although textured implants represent fewer than 10% of implants used in the United States, the country reports the highest incidence of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to perform a systematic literature review on US-based epidemiology to update knowledge on BIA-ALCL in the United States. METHODS Publications on US BIA-ALCL epidemiology were searched between September 2022 and March 2023 on MEDLINE (National Institutes of Health; Bethesda, MD), Embase (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), Web of Science (Clarivate, London, UK), and SCOPUS (Elsevier, Amsterdam, the Netherlands). The US numerator was obtained by averaging the FDA MAUDE database and the PSF PROFILE registry, while the denominator was estimated from chest X-rays, and included female transgender individuals. Prevalence and risk were assessed accordingly, but the incidence rate (IR) could not be updated due to the lack of available follow-up data. RESULTS Out of 987 identified manuscripts, 10 were included. The US prevalence of BIA-ALCL in the literature ranged from 1:300 to 1:500,000 and the IR from 4.5 per 10,000 to 31.1 per 100 million persons per year. A mean value of 453.5 BIA-ALCL cases was calculated. From a denominator of 4,264,618 individuals, which includes all breast implant surfaces, we calculated 414,521 individuals with textured implants, indicating a textured prevalence of 109.4 cases per 100,000 individuals and a risk of 1:913. CONCLUSIONS BIA-ALCL IR, prevalence, and risk has increased when calculated exclusively for patients with textured devices. Although US macrotextured implants were recalled by the FDA, these findings may influence the surveillance of existing patients and the use of macrotextured implants in other parts of the world where they remain widespread. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4
Collapse
|
4
|
Walker JN, Hanson BM, Hunter T, Simar SR, Duran Ramirez JM, Obernuefemann CLP, Parikh RP, Tenenbaum MM, Margenthaler JA, Hultgren SJ, Myckatyn TM. A prospective randomized clinical trial to assess antibiotic pocket irrigation on tissue expander breast reconstruction. Microbiol Spectr 2023; 11:e0143023. [PMID: 37754546 PMCID: PMC10581127 DOI: 10.1128/spectrum.01430-23] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2023] [Accepted: 07/31/2023] [Indexed: 09/28/2023] Open
Abstract
Bacterial infection is the most common complication following staged post-mastectomy breast reconstruction initiated with a tissue expander (TE). To limit bacterial infection, antibiotic irrigation of the surgical site is commonly performed despite little high-quality data to support this practice. We performed a prospective randomized control trial to compare the impact of saline irrigation alone to a triple antibiotic irrigation regimen (1 g cefazolin, 80 mg gentamicin, and 50,000 units of bacitracin in 500 mL of saline) for breast implant surgery. The microbiome in breasts with cancer (n = 16) was compared to those without (n = 16), as all patients (n = 16) had unilateral cancers but bilateral mastectomies (n = 32). Biologic and prosthetic specimens procured both at the time of mastectomy and during TE removal months later were analyzed for longitudinal comparison. Outcomes included clinical infection, bacterial abundance, and relative microbiome composition. No patient in either group suffered a reconstructive failure or developed an infection. Triple antibiotic irrigation administered at the time of immediate TE reconstruction did not reduce bacterial abundance or impact microbial diversity relative to saline irrigation at the time of planned exchange. Implanted prosthetic material adopted the microbial composition of the surrounding host tissue. In cancer-naïve breasts, relative to saline, antibiotic irrigation increased bacterial abundance on periprosthetic capsules (P = 0.03) and acellular dermal matrices (P = 0.04) and altered the microbiota on both. These data show that, relative to saline only, the use of triple antibiotic irrigation in TE breast reconstruction does impact the bacterial abundance and diversity of certain biomaterials from cancer-naïve breasts. IMPORTANCE The lifetime risk of breast cancer is ~13% in women and is treated with a mastectomy in ~50% of cases. The majority are reconstructed, usually starting with a tissue expander to help restore the volume for a subsequent permanent breast implant or the women's own tissues. The biopsychosocial benefits of breast reconstruction, though, can be tempered by a high complication rate of at least 7% but over 30% in some women. Bacterial infection is the most common complication, and can lead to treatment delays, patient physical and emotional distress and escalating health care cost. To limit this risk, plastic surgeons have tried a variety of strategies to limit bacterial infection including irrigating the pocket created after removing the breast implant with antibiotic solutions, but good-quality data are scarce. Herein, we study the value of antibiotics in pocket irrigation using a robust randomized clinical trial design and molecular microbiology approaches.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jennifer N. Walker
- Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics & Environmental Sciences, Center for Infectious Diseases, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Blake M. Hanson
- Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics & Environmental Sciences, Center for Infectious Diseases, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Pediatrics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Center for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Tayler Hunter
- Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Shelby R. Simar
- Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics & Environmental Sciences, Center for Infectious Diseases, School of Public Health, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Division of Infectious Disease, Department of Pediatrics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
- Center for Antimicrobial Resistance and Microbial Genomics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Jesus M. Duran Ramirez
- Department of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics, McGovern Medical School, University of Texas Health Sciences Center, Houston, Texas, USA
| | - Chloe L. P. Obernuefemann
- Department of Molecular Microbiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
- Center for Women’s Infectious Disease Research, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Rajiv P. Parikh
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Marissa M. Tenenbaum
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Julie A. Margenthaler
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Scott J. Hultgren
- Department of Molecular Microbiology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
- Center for Women’s Infectious Disease Research, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| | - Terence M. Myckatyn
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, Missouri, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Keane GC, Keane AM, Diederich R, Kennard K, Duncavage EJ, Myckatyn TM. The evaluation of the delayed swollen breast in patients with a history of breast implants. Front Oncol 2023; 13:1174173. [PMID: 37476374 PMCID: PMC10354431 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1174173] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/26/2023] [Accepted: 06/20/2023] [Indexed: 07/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast implants, whether placed for reconstructive or cosmetic purposes, are rarely lifetime devices. Rupture, resulting from compromised implant shell integrity, and capsular contracture caused by constriction of the specialized scar tissue that normally forms around breast implants, have long been recognized, and remain the leading causes of implant failure. It is apparent, however, that women with breast implants may also experience delayed breast swelling due to a range of etiologic factors. While a majority of delayed seromas associated with breast implants have a benign etiology, this presentation cannot be ignored without an adequate workup as malignancies such as breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), breast implant associated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (BIA-DLBCL), and breast implant associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) can have a similar clinical presentation. Since these malignancies occur with sufficient frequency, and with sometimes lethal consequences, their existence must be recognized, and an appropriate diagnostic approach implemented. A multidisciplinary team that involves a plastic surgeon, radiologist, pathologist, and, as required, surgical and medical oncologists can expedite judicious care. Herein we review and further characterize conditions that can lead to delayed swelling around breast implants.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Grace C. Keane
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States
| | - Alexandra M. Keane
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States
| | - Ryan Diederich
- MidAmerica Plastic Surgery, Glen Carbon, IL, United States
| | - Kaitlyn Kennard
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States
| | - Eric J. Duncavage
- Department of Pathology and Immunology, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States
| | - Terence M. Myckatyn
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Mackay D. Commentary on: The Macrotextured Implant Recall: Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma Risk Aversion in Cosmetic and Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Practices. Aesthet Surg J 2022; 42:1414-1415. [PMID: 35947998 DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjac221] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/04/2022] [Indexed: 12/30/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Donald Mackay
- Department of Surgery, Penn State Hershey College of Medicine, Hershey, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|