INTRODUCTION: For patients undergoing prosthetic breast reconstruction whose device was removed because of infection or exposure, there is no published information examining long-term outcomes. Despite initial failure, many patients want to pursue breast reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction failures during a 5-year period. RESULTS: A total of 26 patients (29 breasts) were identified who failed primary prosthetic 2-stage reconstruction. On average, the device was removed 262 days from the initial expander placement. Of these breasts, 19 were removed for infection, 7 for exposure, and 3 for a combination of both. Of these 29 failures, secondary reconstruction was attempted in 20 (69%). Among secondary reconstructions, 13 were with a device and 7 with autologous tissue. Of the 13 (92.3%) secondary device reconstructions, 12 were successful.Those in whom secondary reconstruction was attempted were younger at initial reconstruction (48 vs 57 years; P = 0.038), had lower body mass indexes (BMIs) (26.0 vs 29.4; P = 0.27), and smaller breasts (650 vs 979 g; P = 0.23) than those who did not attempt secondary reconstruction.Of the nipple-sparing mastectomy patients, 100% underwent secondary reconstruction, whereas only 61% of skin-sparing mastectomy patients underwent secondary reconstruction (P = 0.14).For patients undergoing secondary reconstruction, those receiving a second device reconstruction had lower BMIs (24.7 vs 28.5; P = 0.18) and smaller breasts (489 vs 946 g; P = 0.08) than those with autologous reconstructions; 15% of secondary implant reconstructions underwent irradiation versus 43% of the secondary autologous reconstructions (P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: After failed prosthetic breast reconstruction, a second attempt with an implant in properly selected patients has a high success rate (92.3%).
INTRODUCTION: For patients undergoing prosthetic breast reconstruction whose device was removed because of infection or exposure, there is no published information examining long-term outcomes. Despite initial failure, many patients want to pursue breast reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction failures during a 5-year period. RESULTS: A total of 26 patients (29 breasts) were identified who failed primary prosthetic 2-stage reconstruction. On average, the device was removed 262 days from the initial expander placement. Of these breasts, 19 were removed for infection, 7 for exposure, and 3 for a combination of both. Of these 29 failures, secondary reconstruction was attempted in 20 (69%). Among secondary reconstructions, 13 were with a device and 7 with autologous tissue. Of the 13 (92.3%) secondary device reconstructions, 12 were successful.Those in whom secondary reconstruction was attempted were younger at initial reconstruction (48 vs 57 years; P = 0.038), had lower body mass indexes (BMIs) (26.0 vs 29.4; P = 0.27), and smaller breasts (650 vs 979 g; P = 0.23) than those who did not attempt secondary reconstruction.Of the nipple-sparing mastectomy patients, 100% underwent secondary reconstruction, whereas only 61% of skin-sparing mastectomy patients underwent secondary reconstruction (P = 0.14).For patients undergoing secondary reconstruction, those receiving a second device reconstruction had lower BMIs (24.7 vs 28.5; P = 0.18) and smaller breasts (489 vs 946 g; P = 0.08) than those with autologous reconstructions; 15% of secondary implant reconstructions underwent irradiation versus 43% of the secondary autologous reconstructions (P = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: After failed prosthetic breast reconstruction, a second attempt with an implant in properly selected patients has a high success rate (92.3%).
Authors: Louis H Poppler; Minh-Bao Mundschenk; Andrew Linkugel; Ema Zubovic; Utku C Dolen; Terence M Myckatyn Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Miguel De La Parra Marquez; Ricardo Fernandez-Riera; Hector Vela Cardona; Jesus María Rangel Flores Journal: World J Surg Oncol Date: 2018-04-17 Impact factor: 2.754
Authors: Jordan T Blough; Michael M Vu; Cecil S Qiu; Alexei S Mlodinow; Nima Khavanin; Neil A Fine; John Y S Kim Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2018-12-12