Evidence-Based Protocol for Infection Control in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

Reducing Postbreast Reconstruction Infection Rates: Our Journey to Achieving Low Postoperative Infection Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Breast surgeries are classified as clean procedures associated with a lower risk of post-operative infections; however, the reported infection rates post-breast surgeries are still significantly high. Surgical site infections (SSIs) are indeed one of the most common and serious complications following breast surgery.

METHODOLOGY

A retrospective study assessed the rate of SSIs post-breast reconstructive surgery after the implementation of the infection control protocol at James Cook University Hospital and Friarage Hospital from December 2022 to June 2024. Initial post-operative breast reconstruction cases at James Cook University Hospital and Friarage Hospital showed a high SSI rate of 23%, with Theatre 22 in James Cook University Hospital reporting 25%, despite adherence to infection control protocols.  Subsequent investigations identified Pseudomonas contamination in scrub water taps and inadequate airflow in Theatre 22 as potential sources. Corrective actions were implemented, including relocating surgeries to facilities with superior air filtration and forming a Protocol Reinforcement Team to ensure strict adherence to infection control measures and the Protocol of Breast Reconstruction Surgery (PBRS).  Data was collected from the information department of James Cook University Hospital retrospectively, looking at all patients who underwent breast reconstruction procedures from December 2022 to June 2024. Patients who developed SSIs at the breast reconstruction implant site were identified by reviewing the patients' notes. The confirmed diagnosis as well as the classification and potential risk factors were identified retrospectively from the patients' notes as well. All patients included in the study were strictly adherent to the PBRS. IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows, Version 21 (Released 2012; IBM Corp., Armonk, New York, United States) was used for both descriptive and inferential analyses of the data, and no adjustments were made for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

Among 31 patients (48 procedures), complications included delayed infection (n=1 procedure), drain exit site infection (n=1 procedure), skin necrosis (n=2 procedures), wound dehiscence (n=1 procedure), and seroma (n=1 procedure). We reported low infection rates to post-breast reconstruction with strict adherence to the PBRS (02.08%) in comparison to the current guidelines and published literature (up to 25%).

CONCLUSION

Despite improvements, SSIs remain a significant concern in implant-based breast reconstruction procedures. Adopting and adhering to a standardized PBRS are strongly recommended to further reduce complications and enhance patient outcomes.

Did the National Ban on Bacitracin Irrigation Affect Infection Rates in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction? An Analysis of a National Database

INTRODUCTION

The current standard of practice in implant-based breast reconstruction is irrigation of the mastectomy pocket with antimicrobial solution before implant placement. Prior to being banned and formally recalled in January 2020, bacitracin was a very commonly utilized antibiotic. This study characterizes the effects of the national bacitracin ban on implant-based breast reconstruction infection rates by using a nationwide database to compare complication rates before and after bacitracin was banned.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement (ACS-NSQIP) database was queried retrospectively for all patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction before the bacitracin ban (2012-2019) and afterwards (2020). Demographics, comorbidities, and complications were collected. Univariate analysis and multivariate analysis were conducted to determine if there were significant changes in wound complications, local wound infections, and systemic infections between the 2 case-control matched cohorts.

RESULTS

A total of 37,126 patients were in the pre-ban cohort and 6333 patients were in the post-ban cohort. Before matching, there were significant differences in race distribution, BMI, ASA class, inpatient vs. outpatient status, preoperative smoking, and preoperative diabetes mellitus (all P < .05). After case-control matching, there were 6313 patients in each cohort. Univariate analysis revealed differences in postoperative superficial and organ space surgical site infection, wound complications/infections, all cause complications, and reoperations (all P < .05). Multivariate analysis showed that patients who underwent breast reconstruction before the ban had decreased odds of having wound infections, related infections, all cause complications, and reoperations (all P < .05).

CONCLUSION

This study provides a macroscopic view into the effects of the formal injectable bacitracin ban on breast reconstruction outcomes. Patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction after the ban of injectable bacitracin had higher odds of developing wound infections, related infections, and reoperations. More study into suitable alternatives to injectable bacitracin for surgical site antimicrobial irrigation is warranted.

Oncoplastic breast surgery: A guide to good practice

Oncoplastic Breast Surgery has become standard of care in the management of Breast Cancer patients. These guidelines written by an Expert Advisory Group; convened by the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS), are designed to provide all members of the breast cancer multidisciplinary team (MDT) with guidance on the best breast surgical oncoplastic and reconstructive practice at each stage of a patient's journey, based on current evidence. It is hoped they will also be of benefit to the wide range of professionals and service commissioners who are involved in this area of clinical practice.

Does Implant Surface Texture Affect the Risk of Capsular Contracture in Subglandular Breast Augmentation and Breast Augmentation-Mastopexy?

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have reported decreased rates of capsular contracture associated with the use of textured surface breast implants placed in the subglandular plane during breast augmentation. However, since the publication of these studies, our understanding of the pathophysiology of capsular contracture, as well as the surgical techniques utilized to minimize bacterial contamination of the implant, have advanced considerably.

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to re-evaluate the relation between implant surface texturization and capsular contracture rates for breast implants placed in the subglandular plane during primary breast augmentation.

METHODS

Retrospective chart review was performed of all primary subglandular breast augmentation procedures involving the use of either smooth or textured round silicone gel implants, with or without simultaneous mastopexy. The primary outcome measures included clinically significant capsular contracture (Baker grade III/IV) and revision surgery for capsular contracture.

RESULTS

Between 2010 and 2017, 526 patients underwent primary subglandular breast augmentation with either smooth (n = 212) or textured (n = 314) round silicone gel implants; 248 patients underwent breast augmentation, whereas 278 underwent breast augmentation-mastopexy. Average follow-up was 756 days in the textured group and 461 days in the smooth group. Five cases of capsular contracture were observed in the textured group, and 7 cases of capsular contracture were observed in the smooth group (P = 0.20).

CONCLUSIONS

Smooth surface implants placed in the subglandular plane were not at a significantly increased risk of capsular contracture compared with textured surface implants. We suggest that adherence to a surgical technique focused on minimizing bacterial contamination of the implant is of greater clinical significance than implant surface characteristics when discussing capsular contracture.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

Surgical antibiotic prophylaxis use and infection prevalence in non-cosmetic breast surgery procedures at a tertiary hospital in Western Australia-a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Surgical site infections (SSIs) are a common complication following breast surgery procedures, despite being considered a clean surgery. The prevalence of SSIs can be minimised with the appropriate use of antibiotic prophylaxis as outlined in the Australian Therapeutic Guidelines (eTG). The aims of this study were to evaluate adherence to the eTG for antibiotic prophylaxis in breast surgery procedures at a Western Australian teaching hospital following an update of the guidelines in 2014 and examine the impact of prophylactic antibiotics on SSI incidence and length of hospital stay.

METHOD

A retrospective cross-sectional study which reviewed medical records from a random sample of 250 patients selected from 973 patients who underwent breast surgical procedures between February 2015 and March 2017.

RESULTS

Overall adherence to current eTG occurred in 49.2% (123/250) of operations. Pre-operative and post-operative antibiotics were prescribed in 98.4% (246/250) and 11.2% (28/250) operations respectively. Adherence rates to three specific elements of the eTG (drug prescribed, drug dosage and timing of administration) were 91.6% (229/250), 53.6% (134/250) and 86.4% (216/250) respectively. For the 14.4% (36/250) patients with relevant drug allergies, there was zero adherence to the eTG. Overall recorded SSI prevalence was low at 5.2% (13/250). The mean length of stay in patients (2.3 ± 1.7 days) was not influenced by level of eTG adherence (p = 0.131) or SSIs (p = 0.306).

CONCLUSION

These data demonstrate a significant improvement in overall adherence to the eTG from 13.3% to 49.2% (p =  < 0.001). The level of detected SSIs in this study was low. Further improvement is necessary with respect to prescribing appropriate antibiotic dosages and for those with allergies.

Paravertebral blocks and enhanced recovery after surgery protocols in breast reconstructive surgery: patient selection and perspectives

The management of postoperative pain is of critical importance for women undergoing breast reconstruction after surgical treatment for breast cancer. Mitigating postoperative pain can improve health-related quality of life, reduce health care resource utilization and costs, and minimize perioperative opiate use. Multimodal analgesia pain management strategies with nonopioid analgesics have improved the value of surgical care in patients undergoing various operations but have only recently been reported in reconstructive breast surgery. Regional anesthesia techniques, with paravertebral blocks (PVBs) and transversus abdominis plane (TAP) blocks, and enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been increasingly utilized in opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia protocols for women undergoing breast reconstruction. The objectives of this review are to 1) comprehensively review regional anesthesia techniques in breast reconstruction, 2) outline important components of ERAS protocols in breast reconstruction, and 3) provide evidence-based recommendations regarding each intervention included in these protocols. The authors searched across six databases to identify relevant articles. For each perioperative intervention included in the ERAS protocols, the literature was exhaustively reviewed and evidence-based recommendations were generated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system methodology. This study provides a comprehensive evidence-based review of interventions to optimize perioperative care and postoperative pain control in breast reconstruction. Incorporating evidence-based interventions into future ERAS protocols is essential to ensure high value care in breast reconstruction.

MBN 2016 Aesthetic Breast Meeting BIA-ALCL Consensus Conference Report

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is an uncommon neoplasia occurring in women with either cosmetic or reconstructive breast implants. The actual knowledge about BIA-ALCL deriving from the literature presents several limits, and it remains difficult to make inferences about BIA-ALCL epidemiology, cause, and pathogenesis. This is the reason why the authors decided to organize an evidence-based consensus conference during the Maurizio Bruno Nava (MBN 2016) Aesthetic Breast Meeting held in Milan in December of 2016. Twenty key opinion leaders in the field of plastic surgery from all over the world have been invited to express and discuss their opinion about some key questions on BIA-ALCL, trying to reach a consensus about BIA-ALCL cause, pathogenesis, diagnosis, and treatment in light of the actual best evidence.

Efficacy of Vancomycin-based Continuous Triple Antibiotic Irrigation in Immediate, Implant-based Breast Reconstruction

Background:

Single irrigation of the peri-implant space with a cefazolin-based triple antibiotic solution is a routine antibiotic prophylaxis measure during implant-based breast augmentation and reconstruction. Cefazolin, however, is less efficacious against resistant Staphylococcus species, which are the predominant bacterial species isolated from the peri-implant space. Vancomycin is effective against resistant Staphylococcus species and may be a more appropriate prophylactic agent. The availability of single-injection long-acting anesthetic agents allows the novel use of the elastomeric infusion pump for continuous irrigation of antibiotic solution into the peri-implant space. The efficacy of continuous irrigation with a vancomycin-based solution is evaluated here.

Methods:

Study patients (N = 163; group 1) who underwent immediate, direct-to-implant breast reconstruction received continuous infusion of a vancomycin-based triple antibiotic solution. Patients also received a single injection of liposomal bupivacaine in the pectoralis major/minor muscles for pain control. A historic control group (N = 113; group II) received ropivacaine local anesthetic via the infusion pump and a single intraoperative irrigation of the peri-implant space with the vancomycin-based triple antibiotic solution. Incidence of postsurgical infection during the 6 weeks after surgery was compared between the groups.

Results:

Group I patients had a statistically significant lower incidence of infections (1.9%) than group II patients (6.4%) (P = 0.007). There were no vancomycin-related adverse effects.

Conclusions:

Continuous breast irrigation with a vancomycin-based triple antibiotic solution is a safe and effective accompaniment for immediate implant reconstruction. Use of intramuscular anesthetic injection for postoperative pain control allows the elastomeric infusion pump to be available for local tissue antibiotic irrigation.

Consensus Review of Optimal Perioperative Care in Breast Reconstruction: Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) Society Recommendations

BACKGROUND

Enhanced recovery following surgery can be achieved through the introduction of evidence-based perioperative maneuvers. This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing breast reconstructive surgery and to provide evidence-based recommendations for an enhanced perioperative protocol.

METHODS

A systematic review of meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohorts was conducted for each protocol element. Smaller prospective cohorts and retrospective cohorts were considered only when higher level evidence was unavailable. The available literature was graded by an international panel of experts in breast reconstructive surgery and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. Each recommendation was graded following a consensus discussion among the expert panel. Development of these recommendations was endorsed by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Society.

RESULTS

High-quality randomized controlled trial data in patients undergoing breast reconstruction informed some of the recommendations; however, for most items, data from lower level studies in the population of interest were considered along with extrapolated data from high-quality studies in non-breast reconstruction populations. Recommendations were developed for a total of 18 unique enhanced recovery after surgery items and are discussed in the article. Key recommendations support use of opioid-sparing perioperative medications, minimal preoperative fasting and early feeding, use of anesthetic techniques that decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting and pain, use of measures to prevent intraoperative hypothermia, and support of early mobilization after surgery.

CONCLUSION

Based on the best available evidence for each topic, a consensus review of optimal perioperative care for patients undergoing breast reconstruction is presented.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, V.

Do Prolonged Prophylactic Antibiotics Reduce the Incidence of Surgical-Site Infections in Immediate Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction?

BACKGROUND

Approximately 50,000 women in the United States undergo mastectomy and immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction annually, and most receive postoperative prophylactic antibiotics. The effect of these antibiotics on the risk of surgical-site infections remains unclear.

METHODS

The authors searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases for studies that compared less than 24 hours and greater than 24 hours of antibiotics following immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction. Primary outcomes were surgical-site infections and implant loss. Conservative random effects models were used to obtain pooled relative risk estimates.

RESULTS

The authors identified 927 studies, but only four cohort studies and one randomized controlled trial met their inclusion criteria. Unadjusted incidences of surgical-site infections were 14 percent with more than 24 hours of antibiotics, 19 percent with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, and 16 percent overall. Unadjusted incidences of implant loss were 8 percent with more than 24 hours of antibiotics, 10 percent with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, and 9 percent overall. The pooled relative risk of implant loss was 1.17 (95 percent CI, 0.39 to 3.6) with less than 24 hours of antibiotics, which was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged antibiotic use did not have a statistically significant effect on reducing surgical-site infections or implant loss. There was significant heterogeneity between studies, and prolonged antibiotics may have increased the risk of implant loss in the randomized controlled trial. Definitive evidence may only be obtained with data from more prospective randomized controlled trials.

Surveillance and Prevention of Surgical Site Infections in Breast Oncologic Surgery with Immediate Reconstruction

Surgical site infection (SSI) after immediate breast reconstruction is much more common than would be expected after a clean surgical procedure. Although the SSI rates reported in individual studies are quite variable, there are no obvious explanations for the variation in infection rates between institutions. The microbiology of these SSIs is unusual, with higher proportions of infections caused by atypical Myobacterium species and Gram-negative bacilli than would be expected for this anatomic site. In an effort to prevent SSIs, many surgeons use a variety of different practices including irrigation and soaking of implants with antibiotic solutions and prolonged duration of prophylactic antibiotics, although the literature to support these practices is very sparse. In particular, prolonged use of antibiotics post-discharge is concerning due to the potential for harm, including increased risk of Clostridium difficile infection, development of antibiotic resistant organisms, and drug-related allergic reactions. With higher rates of mastectomy and breast implant reconstruction in women with early-stage breast cancer, including greater utilization of reconstruction in higher-risk individuals, the number of women suffering from infection after oncologic reconstruction will likely continue to increase. It is imperative that more research be done to identify modifiable factors associated with increased risk of infection. It is also essential that larger studies with rigorous study designs be performed to identify optimal strategies to decrease the risk of SSI in this vulnerable population.

Reducing infection risk in implant-based breast-reconstruction surgery: challenges and solutions

Implant-based procedures are the most commonly performed method for postmastectomy breast reconstruction. While donor-site morbidity is low, these procedures are associated with a higher risk of reconstructive loss. Many of these are related to infection of the implant, which can lead to prolonged antibiotic treatment, undesired additional surgical procedures, and unsatisfactory results. This review combines a summary of the recent literature regarding implant-related breast-reconstruction infections and combines this with a practical approach to the patient and surgery aimed at reducing this risk. Prevention of infection begins with appropriate reconstructive choice based on an assessment and optimization of risk factors. These include patient and disease characteristics, such as smoking, obesity, large breast size, and immediate reconstructive procedures, as well as adjuvant therapy, such as radiotherapy and chemotherapy. For implant-based breast reconstruction, preoperative planning and organization is key to reducing infection. A logical and consistent intraoperative and postoperative surgical protocol, including appropriate antibiotic choice, mastectomy-pocket creation, implant handling, and considered acellular dermal matrix use contribute toward the reduction of breast-implant infections.

Seroma in Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Seroma, as a complication of prosthetic breast reconstruction, results in patient distress, increased office visits, undesirable aesthetic outcomes, and--importantly--may escalate to infection and frank prosthesis loss. Herein, the authors review the pathophysiology and risk factors and attempt to collate published practices for avoidance and management of seroma.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed using MEDLINE, Web of Science, Embase, and Cochrane Library for studies published between 2000 and January of 2015. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to estimate the overall pooled incidence of seroma and to examine the effect of drain number and acellular dermal matrix use.

RESULTS

Seventy-two relevant primary articles and three systematic reviews were identified. Fifty-one citations met inclusion criteria, including two randomized controlled trials. The overall pooled incidence was 5.4 percent (95 percent CI, 4.1 to 6.7 percent). Obesity, acellular dermal matrix, and preoperative irradiation were cited risk factors. Pooled relative risk for acellular dermal matrix was 1.83 (95 percent CI, 1.28 to 2.62). Drain practices were collated from 34 articles.

CONCLUSIONS

Seromas following prosthetic breast reconstruction are complicated by the hypovascular, proinflammatory milieu of the mastectomy skin flap, the geometrically complex dead space, and the presence of a foreign body with potential contamination and biofilm. There is reasonable evidence to suggest that these factors contribute to a progression of seroma to infection and prosthesis loss. These findings have motivated this summary article on current practice guidelines and strategies to prevent and treat seromas.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, II.

[Screening for carriage of Staphylococcus aureus prior to mammary reconstruction in the prevention of surgical site infection]

The incidence of prosthesis infections after breast reconstruction is of the order of 4% to 13% according to the literature. In surgical patients, Staphylococcus aureus (S. aureus) is the bacterial species most often responsible for surgical site infections. In cardiac surgery, screening for carriage of S. aureus and preoperative decontamination are carried out routinely before prosthetic surgery. We retrospectively reviewed data from patients at our institution between January 2011 and December 2013. Our series showed that the prosthesis infection rates were in the range of 5.92% in 2008 with an ISO rate of S. aureus 3.61%. Routine screening for prosthetic reconstructions was performed to assess the impact of preoperative decontamination patients in carriers of S. aureus. This screening was done in 381 patients: 17.8% of patients were carriers of S. aureus ; 11 patients have an ISO (or an incidence rate of 2.88%) ; 5 patients have an ISO S. aureus (an incidence of S. aureus ISO 1.3%). The introduction of the screening process, allowed a drop of 5.92% ISO rate at 1.46% with a passage of S. aureus SSI rates of 3, 60% to 0.72%. In the near future, studies are needed to confirm these encouraging results, to demonstrate the efficacy of preoperative decontamination in carriers of S. aureus patients before laying prosthesis.

Clinical and Microbiological Characterization of Late Breast Implant Infections after Reconstructive Breast Cancer Surgery

BACKGROUND

Implant infections represent a relevant problem after immediate breast cancer reconstruction. In addition to difficulties in distinguishing early infections from other post-surgical complications (such as hematoma, seroma, and liponecrosis) late breast implant infections still represent a grey area of our knowledge with regards to heir definition and management. To address this issue, we prospectively monitored breast cancer patients at their center.

METHODS

Between February 1, 2009, and May 31, 2013, we enrolled all patients undergoing breast implant reconstruction or expander-to-prosthesis substitution. Patients without at least 6 mo of post-operative observation were excluded. We collected data from patient records including age, days from surgery (DFS), chemotherapy/radiotherapy, infecting microorganism, type of implant, antibiotic management and eventual implant removal. Sixty days from surgery were defined as the clinical threshold between early and late infection. Infections were further classified according to a graded scale into possible, probable and microbiologically proved.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight infections were recorded out of 766 surgical procedures (10.2%). Fifty-three (67%) cases occurred early ≤60 DFS, and 25 (33%) occurred late (i.e., beyond 60 d). By defining infection types as possible, probable or proved, the majority of late infections were classified as proved (84%) compared with 56% of early infections (p=0.0014). Microbiological isolate distribution was similar in proved early infections compared with proved late infections. Among late infections, a delayed occurrence was observed after prosthesis placement compared with expander insertion. Late infections were fraught with lower treatment success rates (12% vs. 41%, p=0.009).

CONCLUSION

Late infection represents a consistent proportion of infections after immediate breast implant reconstruction or prosthesis placement and bear lower chance of salvage after treatment. An increased attention is warranted to improve prevention and treatment strategies.

Breast reconstruction with tissue expanders: implementation of a standardized best-practices protocol to reduce infection rates

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic infection remains a frustrating and costly complication of breast reconstruction with tissue expanders. Although some specific steps have been previously shown to reduce periprosthetic infections, no comprehensive protocol addressing all aspects of preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative patient management has been evaluated in the literature. The authors' goal was to evaluate the effectiveness of their protocol at reducing periprosthetic infections.

METHODS

A comprehensive, best-practices protocol was introduced and implemented in November of 2010. All patients undergoing breast reconstruction using tissue expanders at the authors' institution in the 5 years before the protocol, and in the 2 years after, were analyzed.

RESULTS

Three hundred five patients underwent 456 tissue expander reconstructions in the 5 years before the protocol, and 198 patients underwent 313 reconstructions in the 2 years after. Significantly fewer patients developed periprosthetic infection after protocol (11.6 percent versus 18.4 percent; p=0.042), and the number of infected tissue expanders trended toward a decrease (9.3 percent versus 13.2 percent; p=0.097). On multivariate analysis, the protocol significantly reduced the odds of periprosthetic infection (OR, 0.45; p=0.022). Predictors of infection included obesity (OR, 2.01; p=0.045) and preoperative breast size larger than C cup (OR, 2.83; p=0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' comprehensive, best-practices protocol allowed them to reduce the odds of tissue expander infections by 55 percent (OR, 0.45; p=0.022). The authors were able to identify several potential areas of improvement that may help them lower the rate of infection further in the future.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Trans-axillary approach for breast implant exchange in high risk cases of irradiated or attenuated skin

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction with implants after tissue expansion is one of the most common methods of reconstruction. Although this approach is generally reliable, exchange of breast tissue expander for implant through the standard anterior incision presents a challenge in cases with attenuated soft tissue envelope due to radiation, thin anatomy, prior surgery, or combination of the above. We propose that a trans-axillary approach is a safe and alternate approach for implant exchange in the high-risk patients.

TECHNIQUE AND CASE EXAMPLES

A case series of 16 patients with multiple risk factors for compromised soft tissue that underwent a trans-axillary approach for implant exchange is reported. The trans-axillary implant exchange technique involves use of a standard 4 cm axillary incision, removal of the expander, judicious capsulotomy, placement of permanent implant, and closure in three separate tissue layers.

RESULTS

All trans-axillary cases were successful and all incisions were well healed without dehiscence, infection, or seroma. The average patient age was 49.4 years, and 50% of patients had received or were scheduled to receive radiation therapy. Nine patients underwent unilateral trans-axillary expander exchange while 7 patients were bilateral. Median implant size was 360 cc (mean 369 cc, range 150-600 cc), and mean follow-up for all patients was over 24 months. There were no cases of implant extrusion, capsular contracture requiring re-operation, or lymphedema. Six patients underwent concurrent or subsequent nipple reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

This approach illustrates application of a technique commonly used in breast aesthetic augmentation to address a common reconstructive dilemma, which we believe to be a useful tool in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction, especially in patients with compromised soft tissue envelopes.