Management of Asymptomatic Patients With Textured Surface Breast Implants

Breast Implant Removal-Only: The Role of Targeted Compression

BACKGROUND

The number of women seeking explantation of their breast implants has increased in recent years. Anxiety due to potential health problems has been one of the major catalysts. Mastopexy with or without autoaugmentation and fat grafting are the main techniques used in breast implant removal surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To analyse the aesthetic and satisfactory outcomes after simple breast implant removal assisted by targeted compression.

METHODS

Twenty-eight patients were included in the series. Targeted compression of the breast after implant removal was performed during the 1st month. A satisfaction survey using a Likert scale was used before and after the final visit. The patients were followed up for 1 year.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 41 years old, and the mean time between implantation and removal was 10 years. Subjective reasons for removal (46.4% of the patients) were more frequent in women with less time since implantation (5 years) versus 15 years for implant-related problems. A total of 57.14% of the women were satisfied with the aesthetic result, and 42.86% were very satisfied. Only 17.8% of the total would consider an aesthetic refinement.

CONCLUSIONS

Simple breast implant removal yields good aesthetic outcomes, and patients are satisfied with the results. Good management of compression of the breast and close follow-up to treat any collection in the pocket provides good adhesion and allows for effective management of the process of deflation and setting of the breast mound.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

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.

Symptom Improvement After Explantation With No Capsulectomy for Systemic Symptoms Associated With Breast Implants

BACKGROUND

Systemic symptoms associated with breast implants (SSBI) is a term used to describe a group of patients who attribute a variety of symptoms to their implants. Previous studies have shown symptom improvement after implant removal in these patients irrespective of whether part or all the implant capsule has been removed.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to evaluate implant removal with no capsule removed in symptomatic and control subjects.

METHODS

Eligible study subjects were sequentially enrolled at 5 investigator sites. The SSBI Cohort included patients with systemic symptoms they attributed to their implants who requested explantation. The Non-SSBI Cohort included subjects without systemic symptoms attributed to their implants who requested explantation with or without replacement. All subjects agreed to undergo explantation without removal of any capsule.

RESULTS

Systemic symptom improvement was noted in SSBI subjects without removal of the implant capsule, comparable to the results of our previously published study. SSBI patients showed a 74% reduction in self-reported symptoms at 6 months with no capsulectomy which was not statistically different from partial or total capsulectomies (P = .23).

CONCLUSIONS

Explantation with or without capsulectomy provides symptom improvement in patients with systemic symptoms they associate with their implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3

Surgical Management of Textured Breast Implants: Assessing Risk and Analyzing Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Textured implants have been linked to breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). Patients who undergo explantation have options for reconstruction, but data on safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are limited. The purpose of this study was to classify complications and PROs in patients opting for surgical management of textured implants.

METHODS

Complication rates and BREAST-Q scores were compared between (1) asymptomatic patients who underwent conversion from textured to smooth implants ( n = 224), (2) symptomatic patients who underwent conversion from textured to smooth implants ( n = 83), (3) patients who underwent explantation without replacement ( n = 44), and (4) patients who underwent replacement with autologous reconstruction ( n = 33). Linear regression examined PROs controlling for clinical and surgical variables.

RESULTS

Overall complication rates in 384 patients (637 implants) differed across groups ( P = 0.034), with the highest rate (25%) in patients who underwent explantation without replacement. These patients were specifically more impacted by minor complications, notably seroma. Capsulectomy extent did not significantly impact complications. Asymptomatic and symptomatic smooth implant patients had improvements in Satisfaction with Breasts ( P < 0.05). Autologous reconstruction patients had significant improvements in Satisfaction with Breasts sustained after 3 months postoperatively ( P < 0.01) and Sexual Well-being sustained after 6-months postoperatively ( P < 0.05). Patients who underwent removal without replacement had lower Physical Well-being of the Chest scores at 1 year or more than the other groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacement of textured implants with smooth implants or flaps is safe and is associated with improved satisfaction with breasts and quality of life. The degree of capsulectomy does not appear to impact the incidence of perioperative complications.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

The Spectrum of Non-neoplastic Changes Associated With Breast Implants: Histopathology, Imaging, and Clinical Significance

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma has been recognized as a distinct entity in the World Health Organization classification of hematolymphoid neoplasms. These neoplasms are causally related to textured implants that were used worldwide until recently. Consequently, there is an increased demand for processing periprosthetic capsules, adding new challenges for surgeons, clinicians, and pathologists. In the literature, the focus has been on breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma; however, benign complications related to the placement of breast implants occur in up to 20% to 30% of patients. Imaging studies are helpful in assessing patients with breast implants for evidence of implant rupture, changes in tissues surrounding the implants, or regional lymphadenopathy related to breast implants, but pathologic examination is often required. In this review, we couple our experience with a review of the literature to describe a range of benign lesions associated with breast implants that can be associated with different clinical presentations or pathogenesis and that may require different diagnostic approaches. We illustrate the spectrum of the most common of these benign disorders, highlighting their clinical, imaging, gross, and microscopic features. Finally, we propose a systematic approach for the diagnosis and handling of breast implant specimens in general.

Ultrasonographic Identification of Shell Surface Types in Commercially Available Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implants

BACKGROUND

Breast implant safety issues have resulted in the need for global product recalls and medical device tracing. Conventional methods of breast implant tracing, have to date proven to be unsuccessful. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of high-resolution ultrasound (HRUS) screening in identifying implanted breast devices.

METHODS

Data from 113 female patients undergoing preoperative ultrasound screening for secondary breast surgery between 2019 and 2022 was prospectively reviewed to evaluate the effectiveness of HRUS imaging with the aid of a sonographic surface catalog to identify the surface and brand type of implanted breast devices. To corroborate the findings and assess the reproducibility of the approach, further evaluations were replicated in New Zealand white rabbits and compared with the results found in humans.

RESULTS

In the human recipients, implant surface and brand types were correctly identified by ultrasound imaging in 99% (112 of 113) and 96% (69 of 72) of the cases, either consultation-only or revision, respectively. This constituted an overall success rate of 98% (181 of 185). Furthermore, in a corroborating New Zealand white rabbit model where full-scale commercial implants were introduced and monitored over many months, from the total 28 analyzed, the surface was accurately identified in a total of 27 cases (the one failure being before generation of a sonograph surface catalogue), demonstrating an overall success rate of 96.4%.

CONCLUSION

HRUS is, therefore, a valid and first-hand tool for breast implant imaging that can correctly evaluate both surface type and brand type alongside other variables such as implant placement, positioning, flipping, or rupture.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

HRUS is a valid and first-hand tool for the identification and traceability of breast implants that evaluates surface type and brand type. This low-cost, accessible, and reproducible practice provides patients with peace of mind and surgeons with a promising diagnostic tool.

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma Awareness: An Analysis of the Responses to an Institutional Campaign and Global Recall

BACKGROUND

We performed an assessment of patient response rates and clinical outcomes to the global recall for textured breast implants and to our institution's letters informing them of their risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patients who had textured implants placed at our institution was completed. Outcome measures included patient response rates to either the global recall or our institution's letters, rate of textured implant removal, and type of subsequent revision surgery.

RESULTS

A total of 1176 patients with textured implants were reviewed for this study. In total, 374 patients (31.8%) reached out to discuss their risk of BIA-ALCL, and 297 (25.3%) eventually presented to the clinic. One hundred twenty eight patients (34.2%) responded after the letter but before the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ban of macrotextured BIOCELL implants, 186 (49.7%) after the FDA ban, and 48 (12.8%) after the manufacturer's multichannel campaign. One hundred eighteen patients with textured implants (11.6%) proceeded with surgery. Most underwent exchange with smooth implants (76 patients [64.4%]) after textured implant removal.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant portion of patients (31.8%) responded to our letters, the FDA ban, and the manufacturer's campaign. Despite the low incidence of BIA-ALCL and the ongoing recommendation for observation in the setting of no symptoms, 11.6% of our patients still elected to proceed with implant removal. Exchange to smooth implants was the most popular surgical option at 64.4%.

Practice Trends in the Management of Asymptomatic Breast Reconstruction Patients with Textured Implants: A Survey Analysis

Despite the increasing prevalence of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, there remains a paucity of literature guiding management of asymptomatic patients with textured breast implants. This risk can be anxiety provoking in breast reconstruction patients given their history of cancer or increased future risk. The purpose of this study is to evaluate current practice trends when managing the concerned asymptomatic patient following textured implant-based breast reconstruction.

Methods

An electronic survey was distributed to members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, regarding management of asymptomatic breast reconstruction patients with textured devices. Anonymous responses were collected, and statistical analysis was performed.

Results

A total of 304 responses were received. Of respondents, 237 (92%) have managed asymptomatic patients with textured devices. Historically, the overwhelming majority (89%) used textured devices; however, only 25% report current use. Regarding management of asymptomatic breast reconstruction patients, 87% recommend conservative management, while 13% recommend surgical management. When surgery is performed, 16.3% of respondents elected for implant exchange, 33.8% recommended implant exchange with partial capsulectomy, and 49.8% elected for implant exchange with total capsulectomy. Evaluation of practice patterns based on demographics demonstrated statistically significant differences in current use of textured devices and management of acellular dermal matrix.

Conclusions

Despite decreased current use, there is a significant population of asymptomatic breast reconstruction patients with a history of textured devices concerned for risk of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. This survey demonstrates ongoing variability in surgeon recommendations regarding conservative and surgical management of these patients and the need for continued development of evidence-based guidelines.

Safely Shaping the Breast After Implant Removal and Total Intact Capsulectomy Using the Mammary Imbrication Lift and Fixation Technique

Background

Implant-based breast augmentation is one of the most popular plastic surgery procedures performed worldwide. As the number of patients who have breast implants continues to rise, so does the number of those who request breast implant removal without replacement. There is little in the current scientific literature describing total intact capsulectomy and simultaneous mastopexy procedures.

Objectives

Here, the authors present their current method using the mammary imbrication lift and fixation technique after explant and total capsulectomy.

Methods

Between 2016 and 2021, a total of 64 patients (mean age: 42.95 years; range, 27-78 years) underwent the described mammary imbrication lift and fixation technique with bilateral breast implant removal and total capsulectomy.

Results

Mean follow-up was 6.5 months (range, 1-36 months). Postoperative complications included minor cellulitis in 1 patient (1.6%), late onset hematoma with infection in 1 patient (1.6%), fat necrosis and pulmonary embolism in 1 patient with prior history of thromboembolic events (1.6%), and breast scar irregularity in 4 patients (6.2%) who required subsequent minor scar revision or steroid injections. Two patients (1.6%) underwent revision surgery with bilateral breast fat grafting to improve shape and add volume.

Conclusions

The mammary imbrication lift and fixation technique described here can safely and simultaneously be performed with a total intact capsulectomy and explant procedure. This technique avoids wide undermining, intentionally opening the capsule, performing subtotal capsulectomy, and preserving blood supply to the breast tissue and nipple with low complication rates.

Level of Evidence 3

Breast reconstruction: Review of current autologous and implant-based techniques and long-term oncologic outcome

Implant-based reconstruction is the most common method of breast reconstruction. Autologous breast reconstruction is an indispensable option for breast reconstruction demanding keen microsurgical skills and robust anatomical understanding. The reconstructive choice is made by the patient after a discussion with the plastic surgeon covering all the available options. Advantages and disadvantages of each technique along with long-term oncologic outcome are reviewed.

Feasibility of Imaging Modalities Combined with a Silicone Gel-Filled Breast Implant in Korean Women

With the occurrence of breast implant crises in Korea, it has become increasingly important to detect complications earlier in patients receiving a device. We have therefore combined imaging modalities with an implant-based augmentation mammaplasty. In this study, we assessed the short-term treatment outcomes and safety of the Motiva ErgonomixTM Round SilkSurface (Establishment Labs Holdings Inc., Alajuela, Costa Rica) in Korean women. A total of 87 women (n = 87) were included in the current study. We compared preoperative anthropometric measurements between the right side and the left side of the breast. Moreover, we also compared the thickness of the skin, subcutaneous tissue and the pectoralis major measured on a breast ultrasound preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively. Furthermore, we analyzed the incidences of postoperative complications and the cumulative complication-free survival. Preoperatively, there was a significant difference in the distance from the nipple to the midline between the left and right side of the breast (p = 0.000). Both sides of the breast showed significant differences in the thickness of the pectoralis major preoperatively and 3 months postoperatively (p = 0.000). A total of 11 cases (12.6%) of postoperative complications occurred; these included five cases (5.7%) of early seroma, two cases (2.3%) of infection, two cases (2.3%) of rippling, one case (1.1%) of hematoma and one case (1.1%) of capsular contracture. Time-to-events were estimated at 386.68 ± 27.79 days (95% CI 334.11-439.27). Here, we describe our experience with imaging modalities in combination with the Motiva ErgonomixTM Round SilkSurface in Korean women.

Clinical recommendations for diagnosis and treatment according to current updated knowledge on BIA-ALCL

Shared strategies and correct information are essential to guide physicians in the management of such an uncommon disease as Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). A systematic review of the literature was performed to collect the most relevant evidence on BIA-ALCL reported cases. A panel of multidisciplinary experts discussed the scientific evidence on BIA-ALCL, and updated consensus recommendations were developed through the Delphi process. The lastest reported Italian incidence of BIA-ALCL is 3.5 per 100.000 implanted patients (95% CI, 1.36 to 5.78), and the disease counts over 1216 cases worldwide as of June 2022. The most common presentation symptom is a late onset seroma followed by a palpable breast mass. In the event of a suspicious case, ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration should be the first step in evaluation, followed by cytologic and immunohistochemical examination. In patients with confirmed diagnosis of BIA-ALCL confined to the capsule, the en-bloc capsulectomy should be performed, followed by immediate autologous reconstruction, while delayed reconstruction applies for disseminate disease or radically unresectable tumor. Nevertheless, a multidisciplinary team approach is essential for the correct management of this pathology.

Mortality Rate in Breast Implant Surgery: Is an Additional Procedure Worthwhile to Mitigate BIA-ALCL Risk?

Background

Because of poor knowledge of risks and benefits, prophylactic explantation of high BIA-ALCL risk breast implant (BI) is not indicated. Several surgical risks have been associated with BI surgery, with mortality being the most frightening. Primary aim of this study is to assess mortality rate in patients undergoing breast implant surgery for aesthetic or reconstructive indication.

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective observational cohort study, Breast Implant Surgery Mortality rate (BISM) was calculated as the perioperative mortality rate among 99,690 patients who underwent BI surgery for oncologic and non-oncologic indications. Mean age at first implant placement (A1P), implant lifespan (IL), and women’s life expectancy (WLE) were obtained from a literature review and population database.

Results

BISM rate was 0, and mean A1P was 34 years for breast augmentation, and 50 years for breast reconstruction. Regardless of indication, overall mean A1P can be presumed to be 39 years, while mean BIL was estimated as 9 years and WLE as 85 years.

Conclusion

This study first showed that the BISM risk is 0. This information, and the knowledge that BI patients will undergo one or more revisional procedures if not explantation during their lifetime, may help surgeons in the decision-making process of a pre-emptive substitution or explant in patients at high risk of BIA-ALCL. Our recommendation is that patients with existing macrotextured implants do have a relative indication for explantation and total capsulectomy. The final decision should be shared between patient and surgeon following an evaluation of benefits, surgical risks and comorbidities.

Level of Evidence IV

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.

[The Emerging Interest in Breast Implant Illness and its impact on Patient Behavior]

Breast implant illness (BII) is a loosely defined term for a collection of non-specific systemic symptoms that are hypothesised to be associated with breast implants. BII symptoms include fatigue, hair loss, rashes, chronic pain, and others. However, conclusive evidence for a causal relationship between silicone implants and BII remains lacking. In the light of recent findings that textured implants can, in rare cases, lead to breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), a potential link between breast implants and BII is conceivable and justifies further investigation. We observe a growing number of patients seeking consultation and treatment for systemic symptoms related to breast implants, which is reflected in increasing interest in literature and social media. The aim of this work was to investigate the growing interest in BII. We now describe the clinical features of a patient who suffers from symptoms that are consistent with BII and contextualise clinical presentation in a review of literature and google trend analysis.

What 736 Plastic Surgeons Think about Explantation and Capsulectomy: A Global Opinion Poll

BACKGROUND

Breast implant illness, although not classified as a disease entity, has recently gained significant attention globally. The purpose of this study was to assess the status of explantation practices, discuss plastic surgeon's attitude toward requests for explantation and capsulectomy, and evaluate surgical management when accepting these challenges.

METHODS

Twenty closed-ended multiple choice questions were formulated to an opinion poll. The anonymous opinion poll was distributed to members of American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and presidents of plastic surgery societies on all continents.

RESULTS

A total of 736 plastic surgeons responded to the opinion poll. Although geographic variation was noted, a majority of 69.8 percent stated that explantation surgery had increased in their practice compared to the previous year. Requests for explantation without capsulectomy met with high acceptance rates among surgeons, regardless of whether patients were asymptomatic or not. Patients who also requested capsulectomy received less enthusiastic replies depending on the type of practice, years in practice, implant position, and type of capsulectomy (en bloc, total, or partial). When fat grafting was indicated, 68.7 percent stated that simultaneous lipofilling is limited when capsulectomy is performed, yet 44.5 percent stated that they would remove thin normal capsules in a symptomatic patient even when simultaneous fat grafting is requested by the patient.

CONCLUSION

The opinion poll supports the hypothesis that demand for explantation and capsulectomy increased globally among symptomatic and asymptomatic patients; that attitudes toward simultaneous capsulectomy are divided; and that management may differ according to geographic location, experience, and type of practice.

Management of Asymptomatic Patients With Textured Breast Implants: A Survey Analysis of Members of The Aesthetic Society

BACKGROUND

The management of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has been well established. However, there is minimal data and significant variability in the management of asymptomatic textured implant (ATI) patients.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to survey members of The Aesthetic Society on management of ATI patients in order to understand trends in practice patterns.

METHODS

Members of The Aesthetic Society were queried via an electronic survey regarding management of ATI patients. Anonymous responses were collected by QualtricsXM (SAP, Walldorf, Germany) survey software. Descriptive statistics were used to examine the data, reported as frequencies. All analyses were performed with IBM SPSS Statistics 26.

RESULTS

The survey was sent to 2149 active and candidate members of The Aesthetic Society with a total of 470 responses (21.87% response rate). For ATI patients presenting with concerns regarding BIA-ALCL risk, 88.8% of respondents educate the patient with clinical follow-up and/or imaging. The other 11.2% of surgeons recommend implant removal with variability in capsulectomy technique. For ATI patients requesting surgery, 42.5% of respondents educate the patient with clinical follow-up and/or imaging. The majority of surgeons (57.6%) recommend removal of the implant, with 30% recommending total capsulectomies.

CONCLUSIONS

There is considerable variability in how members of The Aesthetic Society manage ATI patients who request surgery. Future regulatory agency and professional society collaborative efforts should continue to aim for generation of high-level scientific data to aid in the counseling and management of ATI patients.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

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.

Commentary on: Understanding Breast Implant Illness

BACKGROUND

Breast implant surgery is the most common plastic surgery procedure performed globally. A subset of women with breast implants report experiencing a myriad of disabling and distressing physical and psychological symptoms attributed to their implants. Social media groups have coined the condition "breast implant illness" (BII). Little to no scientific research currently exists for BII.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate the experiences of women with BII (both those with implants still in place and those who have explanted) and compare them with those of a control group of women with implants who do not report BII.

METHODS

Women with self-reported BII and implants still in place (n = 51), self-reported BII who had explanted (n = 60), and women with implants in place without BII (n = 58) completed online self-report questionnaires about their symptoms, physical and mental health, health service use patterns, and lifestyle factors (eg, exercise, smoking, alcohol consumption).

RESULTS

Women with BII, regardless of whether they had undergone explant surgery, reported experiencing more severe somatic symptoms, higher depression, anxiety and health anxiety, and poorer physical health than women without BII.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings highlight the need for further investigation into the causes, risk factors, long-term effects, and potential interventions for women who experience BII.

Smooth versus Textured Implant Breast Reconstruction: Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complications

BACKGROUND

The association between textured surface breast implants and breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma has led to an increase in surgical procedures to exchange textured devices to smooth surface implants. Because patient satisfaction is an integral part of breast reconstruction, the purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes between smooth and textured implant recipients.

METHODS

Patients aged 18 years or older who underwent implant-based postmastectomy breast reconstruction with either smooth or textured devices from 2009 to 2017 and completed the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure following reconstruction were included in this analysis. The primary outcomes of interest were mean and median BREAST-Q scores and postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Overall, 1077 patients were included-785 who underwent breast reconstruction with smooth implants and 292 who underwent breast reconstruction with textured implants. No statistical differences were observed between the textured and smooth implant groups for any of the BREAST-Q domain scores at any of the early (3-month) to late (2-year) postoperative time points. Smooth implant recipients reported significantly more rippling (p = 0.003) than textured implant recipients. In contrast, textured implant recipients had a higher rate of cellulitis than smooth implant recipients (p = 0.016).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest that postoperative satisfaction with breasts or health-related quality of life following immediate postmastectomy implant-based breast reconstruction is likely independent of implant surface type. However, smooth breast implants may result in more rippling. The authors' findings represent an important aid in counseling patients who have questions about the risks and benefits of replacing their textured implants with smooth surface devices.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Evaluating the Necessity of Capsulectomy in Cases of Textured Breast Implant Replacement

BACKGROUND

Capsulectomy has traditionally been recommended as a treatment for capsular contracture after breast augmentation. With the advent of breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), and the Food and Drug Administration's decision to ban Biocell textured devices, this operation has taken on new importance. This review was undertaken to better inform clinical recommendations for women with textured devices.

METHODS

An electronic search was performed using PubMed to identify all the available literature on the subject of capsulectomy and open capsulotomy (the alternative treatment).

RESULTS

Fifty-seven articles on this topic were identified. Capsulectomy was widely recommended for treatment of capsular contracture, although many authors recommended leaving thin capsular tissue behind in the absence of symptoms. En bloc resection was recommended only for women with a diagnosis of BIA-ALCL. No information supported a prophylactic role for capsulectomy in asymptomatic women with textured breast implants who are concerned regarding their future risk of BIA-ALCL. Routine pathologic examination in asymptomatic patients was not supported.

DISCUSSION

Capsulectomy adds substantially to the surgical risk, discomfort, recovery time, and expense. Implant removal or replacement without a simultaneous capsulectomy is atraumatic and poses negligible risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Capsulectomy introduces additional morbidity and is not mandatory for asymptomatic patients. Implant removal or exchange for smooth implants without a capsulectomy may be an acceptable choice for many women who do not demonstrate capsular pathology. However, any symptoms or surgical findings suggesting pathology warrant a capsulectomy. En bloc resections are reserved for patients diagnosed with BIA-ALCL.

An Algorithm for the Management of Explantation Surgery

Creating pleasing breast aesthetics after an explantation can be challenging, especially when performed with a total capsulectomy. The necessity of a capsulectomy for a variety of breast issues is not completely agreed on and can increase adverse events, patient morbidity, and cost of the operation and often impairs the final aesthetic result. In this article, an algorithm for the management of explantation patients provides a framework for treatment of the capsule and the breast to optimize outcomes.

The Capsule Question: How Much Should Be Removed with Explantation of a Textured Device?

SUMMARY

Current controversies surrounding breast implants are focused not only on the implant but also on the capsule. There has been tremendous discussion regarding how much of the capsule, if any, should be removed during explantation for benign conditions. The appearance of benign capsules is highly variable ranging from a thin membrane to densely fibrotic with calcifications. The options for capsulectomy include none, partial, complete, complete-intact, and en bloc. Some patients are requesting en bloc capsulectomy even in the absence of anaplastic large cell lymphoma; however, the scientific evidence only supports this for patients with capsular malignancies. The purpose of this article is to review the old and new evidence to answer the question regarding how much capsule should be removed during explantation for benign conditions.

Management of Symptomatic Patients with Textured Implants

SUMMARY

Proper management of symptomatic textured implant patients is critical to identify and treat associated oncologic disease. Textured surface breast implants were first introduced more than 50 years ago in an effort to decrease high rates of capsular contracture and implant malposition observed with first-generation smooth surface breast implants. Textured implants were dominant over smooth devices in the United States in the late 1990s, but they fell out of favor for newer-generation smooth implants, while texture remained the dominant selling implants worldwide until recently. A class I device recall by the US Food and Drug Administration in 2019 precipitated a removal of the highest selling implant worldwide, Allergan Biocell, due to a disproportionately increased risk of breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). Operative strategies, such as bacterial control at the time of textured implant insertion, have not been credibly shown to affect or prevent the future development of BIA-ALCL. BIA-ALCL patients require complete surgical excision of their disease, whereas textured implant patients who are otherwise asymptomatic do not require surgical removal. For suspicious cases, diagnostic testing with CD30 immunohistochemistry should be performed before any surgical intervention. Capsules are evaluated with 12 strategic regional biopsies in a standardized approach. If surgeons are revising or exchanging textured implants, they may reasonably consider a total capsulectomy, though this is not advocated by the Food and Drug Administration or national societies, and has not been shown to mitigate future risk of BIA-ALCL. The purpose of this article is to review data on and outcomes for textured surface implants, disease-associated risk, and the management strategy for revisionary surgery and device surveillance.

Elective Implant Removal and Replacement in Asymptomatic Aesthetic Patients with Textured Devices

SUMMARY

The management of patients with breast implants requires secondary procedures through the life of the implant, sometimes in the early postoperative period and more commonly many years after the initial surgery. In performing revisional procedures, removal and replacement of the implants is often required for a variety of reasons. With growing concerns of implant safety, implant exchange or removal with or without a capsulectomy has been increasingly requested by patients. In particular, textured breast implants have been under increased scrutiny secondary to their association with breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Unfortunately, to date, there are no data and very little guidance as to the appropriate management of patients currently with textured implants as well as patients with a history of having had textured implants placed in the past. The surgeon must not only consider the appropriate management of patients with uncomplicated, asymptomatic textured devices but also consider the appropriate management when faced with another indication for revisional surgery and the need determine the appropriate course of action. An algorithm for the management of the explantation patient in general will be introduced in this review with a focus on the rationale, planning, and management of patients with an uncomplicated, asymptomatic textured implants.

Not All Breast Explants Are Equal: Contemporary Strategies in Breast Explantation Surgery

SUMMARY

Breast implant removal and replacement has been a common secondary breast procedure in the long-term maintenance of breast augmentation, but more recently growing concerns about silicone-related systemic illness, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL), and changing perceptions of aesthetic beauty have seen breast implant removal without replacement become increasingly requested by patients. Explantation can be challenging, especially when performed with a total capsulectomy. Currently, there is no evidence regarding whether a partial or total capsulectomy has any effect on BIA-ALCL risk mitigation in patients that have textured implants without disease. Total capsulectomy with incomplete resection of a mass can contribute to hyperprogression of BIA-ALCL and death. There have also been cases of BIA-ALCL diagnosed years after removal of the textured device and "total capsulectomy." Therefore, the common practice of simple prophylactic capsulectomy in a textured implant to mitigate future disease has not been established and at the current time should be discouraged. In addition, aesthetic outcomes can be quite variable, and patients should have appropriate preoperative counseling regarding the indications and contraindications for explantation, associated risks, financial implications, and postoperative appearance. The authors review salient aspects related to the planning and management of breast implant removal.

En Bloc Capsulectomy for Breast Implant Illness: A Social Media Phenomenon?

BACKGROUND

En bloc capsulectomy has recently increased in prominence as a potential surgical therapy for patients with breast implant illness (BII). However, this procedure has chiefly been recommended for treating breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL).

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to review the current literature and evaluate the public understanding of treatment options for BII via social media to characterize any potential communication disconnect between clinicians and patients.

METHODS

An electronic literature review was performed to identify all available publications mentioning evidence-based support for en bloc capsulectomy as treatment for BII and BIA-ALCL. Twitter social media posts referencing BII or BIA-ALCL were analyzed from 2010 to 2019. Author identity and any mention of surgical treatment were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 115 publications on the subject of BII and 315 articles on BIA-ALCL were identified. En bloc resection was recommended only for patients with a diagnosis of BIA-ALCL. A total of 6419 tweets referencing BII and 6431 tweets referencing BIA-ALCL were identified. Tweets referencing BIA-ALCL were significantly more likely to be authored by physicians (25.9% vs 5.3%, P < 0.001), and tweets referencing BII were significantly more likely to mention any surgical treatment (7.8% vs 1.9%, P < 0.001) and en bloc capsulectomy (1.4% vs 0.3%, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that a communication disconnect exists between the scientific literature and social media regarding treatment options for BII and BIA-ALCL. Physicians should be aware of these potential misconceptions to empathetically address patient concerns in a patient-centered manner.

Breast Augmentation Surgery: How Do We Do It? Results of a Joint Survey from European Association of Societies of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the current perceptions, preferences, and practice of plastic surgeons in Europe regarding breast implant surgery after the controversy on macrotextured implants and BIA-ALCL and the voluntary recall of all biocell implants.

METHODS

A survey comprising 15 questions about implant selection and postoperative routines associated with breast augmentation was sent to all society members of the EASAPS.

RESULTS

Out of 1473 correspondents, 416 completed the survey with response rate being 28.2%. Countries with less than ten respondents were not included in the analysis. A total of 359 respondents (24.4%) were included in the analysis. Twenty-one respondents (5.8%) had a clinical experience < 5 years, 43 (12%) had 5-10 years' experience, and 295 (82.2%) had > 10 years' experience. Regarding the type of implant, only 6.1% would use a macrotextured implant. Fourteen per cent of surgeons would recommend to change a biocell implant in any case, even without symptoms or problems (rupture, seroma, and capsular contracture), 99.7% would send the capsule for histopathological study (99.7%), 98.9% would perform bilateral implant replacement in case of a unilateral problem of rupture, contracture, or seroma, and 80.8% of respondents considered capsulectomy as a technique for managing capsular contracture degree III/IV.

CONCLUSIONS

The main conclusion is the heterogenicity of answers and practice, due to the lack of guidelines and scientific evidence on breast implants. Although 22 (6.1%) respondents would use a macrotextured implant (either round or anatomic), 71.6% of respondents considered that there is not enough information for removing macrotextured implants from the market and that they should be allowed to be used unrestrictedly or under close surveillance of the regulatory agencies.

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 .

A Cautionary Tale and Update on Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL)

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large T-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) was first recognized by the World Health Organization in 2016. The total number of cases worldwide continues to increase, with >800 cases confirmed through a combination of Food and Drug Administration data, verified reports, and registries. To date, 33 deaths have been reported. Typical presentation includes a late seroma containing monoclonal T cells that are CD30 positive and anaplastic lymphoma kinase negative. We present a review of the current literature and report on 3 cases of BIA-ALCL at our institution, which serve to illustrate our approach to diagnosis and management of this disease. In 2 cases, the diagnosis of BIA-ALCL was not initially confirmed due to an incomplete workup but was recognized upon explantation. The seroma fluid was sent for flow cytometry. Initially, the cells were reported as morphologically suspicious for malignancy with phenotypically normal T cells based on standard CD3+ T-cell gating. Subsequent cytology specimens were reported as consistent with recurrent adenocarcinoma. However, upon regating of flow-cytometry data, a population of CD30+, CD3- T cells was noted and the diagnosis of BIA-ALCL was confirmed by immunohistochemical stains of the excised breast capsule specimen. Given the increasing incidence of this disease, as plastic surgeons we must stay informed to order the correct workup to avoid misdiagnosis and be prepared to appropriately refer affected patients to centers with multidisciplinary teams experienced in the management of BIA-ALCL.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma in Australia: A Longitudinal Study of Implant and Other Related Risk Factors

BACKGROUND

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an emerging cancer that has been linked to the use of textured devices. The recent increase in number and frequency of cases has led to worldwide regulatory action.

OBJECTIVES

The authors aimed to longitudinally study BIA-ALCL in Australia since the index case was first reported in 2007.

METHODS

Confirmed historical cases were collected and then prospectively analyzed from October 2015 to May 2019. Clinical and implant exposure data were determined and compared with company sales data for 4 devices to generate implant-specific risk.

RESULTS

A total 104 cases of BIA-ALCL were diagnosed in Australia with exposure to 149 unique breast implants. The mean age of patients was 48.2 years (range, 22.4-78.5 years). They had an average time from implantation to diagnosis of 6.8 years. A total 51.7% of implants utilized in this cohort were Allergan Biocell devices. The indication for implant usage was for primary cosmetic augmentation in 70%, post-breast cancer reconstruction in 23%, and following weight loss/pregnancy in 7%. The majority of women presented with early (stage 1) disease (87.5%). The risk for developing BIA-ALCL ranged from 1 in 1947 sales (95% confidence interval = 1199-3406) for Silimed Polyurethane devices to 1 in 36,730 (95% confidence interval = 12,568-178,107) for Siltex imprinted textured devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Implants with higher surface area/texture seem to be more associated with BIA-ALCL in Australia. Recent regulatory action to suspend, cancel, or recall some of these higher risk devices is supported by these findings.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2