T Delaporte1, E Delay, G Toussoun, M Delbaere, R Sinna. 1. Unité de chirurgie plastique et esthétique, espace Brotteaux, 13 ter, place Jules-Ferry, 69006 Lyon, France. drthomasdelaporte@gmail.com
Abstract
UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND OF STUDY: The purpose of this prospective study is to detail the preliminary results, the advantages and drawbacks of a new iterative fat transfer protocol in selected breast reconstructions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifteen patients had breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer by this iterative lipomodeling protocol, between 2002 and 2007. Clinical and technical aspects are described. Indications, advantages, drawbacks, complications and morphological results are discussed. RESULTS: Mean age at first stage procedure was 50 years (min: 41, max: 57). Indications were eight delayed breast reconstructions, three salvage reconstructions after flap failure, two restorations following primary chest wall reconstruction, two immediate breast reconstructions. Two to five sequential procedures were necessary to obtain a satisfactory breast volume (mean: three procedures). Mean total transferred fat volume was 600 cm(3) (min: 266 cm(3), max: 926 cm(3)). Multiple procedures were performed: restoration of breast skin envelope by abdominal advancement fasciocutaneous flap, breast contours liposuction, controlateral breast symmetrisation, nipple areola complex reconstruction. Mean follow-up was 28 months. The aesthetics results have been judged as very good in 10 patients, good in four patients and poor in one patient. The satisfaction rate of the patients is high: 10 patients are pleased, four patients are satisfied and one patient is moderately satisfied. CONCLUSION: Fat transfer alone can efficiently restore breast volume after mastectomy, granting all advantages related with autologous reconstruction. No donor site morbidity is present; in fact some secondary benefits are observed thanks to the correction of eventual disgraceful lipodystrophies. These secondary benefits strengthen patient compliance improving iterative procedures tolerance. Lack of available adipose tissue and high breast volume are the major morphological limits of the technique. In our experience, fat transfer appears to be a promising technique for breast reconstruction. Long term results still have to be evaluated before it can become a standard.
UNLABELLED: BACKGROUND OF STUDY: The purpose of this prospective study is to detail the preliminary results, the advantages and drawbacks of a new iterative fat transfer protocol in selected breast reconstructions. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Fifteen patients had breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer by this iterative lipomodeling protocol, between 2002 and 2007. Clinical and technical aspects are described. Indications, advantages, drawbacks, complications and morphological results are discussed. RESULTS: Mean age at first stage procedure was 50 years (min: 41, max: 57). Indications were eight delayed breast reconstructions, three salvage reconstructions after flap failure, two restorations following primary chest wall reconstruction, two immediate breast reconstructions. Two to five sequential procedures were necessary to obtain a satisfactory breast volume (mean: three procedures). Mean total transferred fat volume was 600 cm(3) (min: 266 cm(3), max: 926 cm(3)). Multiple procedures were performed: restoration of breast skin envelope by abdominal advancement fasciocutaneous flap, breast contours liposuction, controlateral breast symmetrisation, nipple areola complex reconstruction. Mean follow-up was 28 months. The aesthetics results have been judged as very good in 10 patients, good in four patients and poor in one patient. The satisfaction rate of the patients is high: 10 patients are pleased, four patients are satisfied and one patient is moderately satisfied. CONCLUSION:Fat transfer alone can efficiently restore breast volume after mastectomy, granting all advantages related with autologous reconstruction. No donor site morbidity is present; in fact some secondary benefits are observed thanks to the correction of eventual disgraceful lipodystrophies. These secondary benefits strengthen patient compliance improving iterative procedures tolerance. Lack of available adipose tissue and high breast volume are the major morphological limits of the technique. In our experience, fat transfer appears to be a promising technique for breast reconstruction. Long term results still have to be evaluated before it can become a standard.
Authors: Tala B Shahin; Kairavi V Vaishnav; Marcy Watchman; Vignesh Subbian; Ethan Larson; Evangelia Chnari; David G Armstrong Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2017-10-23
Authors: Maurizio B Nava; Phillip Blondeel; Giovanni Botti; Francesco Casabona; Giuseppe Catanuto; Mark W Clemens; Domenico De Fazio; Roy De Vita; James Grotting; Dennis C Hammond; Paul Harris; Paolo Montemurro; Alexandre Mendonça Munhoz; Maurice Nahabedian; Stefano Pompei; Alberto Rancati; Gino Rigotti; Marzia Salgarello; Gianfranco Scaperrotta; Andrea Spano; Costantin Stan; Nicola Rocco Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2019-10-28
Authors: Benjamin H L Howes; Beverley Fosh; David I Watson; Jia Miin Yip; Michael Eaton; Andrea Smallman; Nicola R Dean Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2014-04-07