Lombardo A, Antonetti AR, Studin J, Stile F, Giles D, Healy J, Kim R, Schierle C, Gupta V, Rios L. Safety of a Protective Funnel in Primary Breast Augmentation: A Retrospective Analysis of 380 Multicenter Cases in the United States.
Aesthet Surg J 2021;
41:1029-1037. [PMID:
33865237 DOI:
10.1093/asj/sjab198]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Protective funnel devices are commonly used to deliver implants in primary breast augmentation (BA) yet there is a paucity of evidence-based data describing their safety in the literature.
OBJECTIVES
The purpose of this study was to assess the safety of protective funnels in primary BA within the first 30 days postoperatively.
METHODS
This multicenter, Level 3 study retrospectively reviewed the surgical records of 380 consecutive patients (760 breasts) who underwent primary BA by 9 board-certified plastic surgeons using the iNPLANT Funnel (Proximate Concepts LLC, Allendale, NJ) for implant delivery between November 2019 and December 2020. Data were collected pertaining to demographics, implant information, surgery details, and postoperative complications.
RESULTS
The mean patient age was 33 years and 76% of patients had a BMI <25 kg/m2. Of this cohort, 11.4% were smokers, 0.8% had diabetes, and 83% were ASA Class 1. All patients received smooth implants with a median volume of 375 cc. A total of 8 (2.1%) complications were reported, including 3 hematomas (0.79%), 1 seroma (0.26%), and 1 superficial infection (0.26%). No patient required explantation. We identified ASA class, BMI, surgery duration, and implant size as potential risk factors.
CONCLUSIONS
The data suggest that the use of protective funnels, such as the iNPLANT Funnel, in primary BA is a safe option when these are utilized according to the manufacturer's Instructions for Use. The use of this device led to a low infection rate (0.26%) and a complication rate of (2.1%) consistent with the average reported in the literature (2%-2.5%).1 Implications for clinical practice are encouraging and future research will include a prospective analysis with a larger case series and potentially a control group.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3
Collapse