Passot-Type Immediate Breast Reconstruction Obviates the Use of Aceullular Dermal Matrix in Grades 2 and 3 Ptosis

Safety of Breast Reconstruction Using Inferiorly Based Dermal Flap for the Ptotic Breast

INTRODUCTION

The use of an inferiorly based dermal flap (IBDF) with implant insertion allows for 1-step reconstruction of a ptotic breast after mastectomy. An IBDF allows for secondary protection of the inferior pole and provides a vascularized pocket for implant insertion. Previous literature has demonstrated the use of this surgical approach for optimal patient satisfaction and higher patient-reported outcomes.For this approach, the dermal flap epidermis is removed before insetting; however, invaginations containing epithelial components may serve as a nidus for infection. There is no study that has compared the safety of an IBDF technique to standard reconstruction. We hypothesize that there is no increase in surgical complications in the IBDF approach versus standard reconstruction.

METHODS

This is a single-institution retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent implant-based reconstruction from June 2016 through December 2020. Patients who did not have a permanent implant placed by December 2020 or had delayed reconstruction were excluded. Two cohorts were established: those who underwent immediate reconstruction after mastectomy via IBDF and reconstruction without an IBDF. Patient demographics, use of the IBDF technique, and surgical complications were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 208 breasts were included: 52 breasts in the IBDF cohort and 156 breasts in the control cohort. There were no statistically significant differences between cohorts, except that the IBDF cohort has a significantly higher body mass index (mean = 30.9 vs 26.5, P ≤ .001).There was no statistically significant difference in the rate of complications between the IBDF and control groups, including seroma (5.8% vs 3.8%), hematoma (3.8% vs 0.6%), wound dehiscence (0.0% vs. 1.9%), mastectomy flap necrosis (11.5% vs 6.4%), breast infection (5.8% vs 7.1%), implant salvage (0.0% vs 5.8%), and implant loss (5.8% vs. 5.8%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an IBDF to reconstruct a ptotic breast immediately after mastectomy has a similar risk profile to an immediate standard breast reconstruction. This technique has resulted in optimal patient satisfaction scores and allows for a "one-stop reconstruction" of ptotic breasts that normally would undergo sequential revisions. In conclusion, immediate implant-based reconstruction of a ptotic breast after mastectomy using a IBDF can be performed safely.