OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare breast symmetry and patient satisfaction with breast appearance between implant-based breast reconstruction using TiLoop Bra mesh combined with pectoralis major disconnection (IMR) and conventional implant reconstruction (IR), and to analyze differences in complications. METHODS: This retrospective study included 59 patients administered IMR or IR in 2016 to 2018. Three-dimensional scanning was performed to objectively evaluate breast symmetry. The BREAST-Q scale was used to survey satisfaction with breast appearance, social psychosocial health, physical health, and sexual well-being. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, TNM stage, and chemotherapy between the 2 groups (all P > 0.05). In 3-dimensional scanning data, patients who underwent IMR had better bilateral breast symmetry compared with those administered IR (all P < 0.001). Based on the BREAST-Q survey, the satisfaction rate was significantly higher for IMR compared with IR (P = 0.0368), whereas psychosocial health, physical health, and sexual well-being showed no significant differences between the 2 groups (all P > 0.05). The IMR model showed no obvious advantages in common complications, including hematoma, incision site infection, skin flap necrosis, and prosthesis exposure and rupture compared with IR; loss of skin and nipple sensations was evident in both groups. The IMR model was associated with reduced incidence of fibrous capsule contracture compared with IR (0% vs 18.75%, P = 0.0267). The incidence rates of pectoralis major disconnection syndrome after IMR and IR were 18.50% and 0%, respectively (P = 0.0161). CONCLUSIONS: Patients administered IMR have better breast symmetry and greater satisfaction with breast appearance compared with those treated by IR; however, IMR has unique complications, including pectoralis major disconnection syndrome.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare breast symmetry and patient satisfaction with breast appearance between implant-based breast reconstruction using TiLoop Bra mesh combined with pectoralis major disconnection (IMR) and conventional implant reconstruction (IR), and to analyze differences in complications. METHODS: This retrospective study included 59 patients administered IMR or IR in 2016 to 2018. Three-dimensional scanning was performed to objectively evaluate breast symmetry. The BREAST-Q scale was used to survey satisfaction with breast appearance, social psychosocial health, physical health, and sexual well-being. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, TNM stage, and chemotherapy between the 2 groups (all P > 0.05). In 3-dimensional scanning data, patients who underwent IMR had better bilateral breast symmetry compared with those administered IR (all P < 0.001). Based on the BREAST-Q survey, the satisfaction rate was significantly higher for IMR compared with IR (P = 0.0368), whereas psychosocial health, physical health, and sexual well-being showed no significant differences between the 2 groups (all P > 0.05). The IMR model showed no obvious advantages in common complications, including hematoma, incision site infection, skin flap necrosis, and prosthesis exposure and rupture compared with IR; loss of skin and nipple sensations was evident in both groups. The IMR model was associated with reduced incidence of fibrous capsule contracture compared with IR (0% vs 18.75%, P = 0.0267). The incidence rates of pectoralis major disconnection syndrome after IMR and IR were 18.50% and 0%, respectively (P = 0.0161). CONCLUSIONS:Patients administered IMR have better breast symmetry and greater satisfaction with breast appearance compared with those treated by IR; however, IMR has unique complications, including pectoralis major disconnection syndrome.