Ashraf A Patel1, Shanique A Martin2, Jennifer E Cheesborough2, Gordon K Lee2, Rahim S Nazerali3. 1. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, 770 Welch Rd, Suite 400, Stanford, CA 94305, United States; College of Medicine, SUNY Upstate Medical University, Syracuse, NY, United States. 2. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, 770 Welch Rd, Suite 400, Stanford, CA 94305, United States. 3. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, 770 Welch Rd, Suite 400, Stanford, CA 94305, United States. Electronic address: rahimn@stanford.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Patients often pursue revisions following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) to achieve their desired result. Fat grafting is a popular choice for patients and can be performed at second stage reconstruction or at a future date as a revisionary surgery. We investigate the best time to fat graft in IBR by comparing the outcomes of patients who received fat grafting during implant placement with those who pursued fat grafting during a tertiary procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 157 patients (270 breasts) who underwent immediate two-stage IBR and fat grafting over a five-year period (2012-2016) at our institution. Two cohorts were created based on timing of first fat grafting procedure: immediate (IFG) and delayed (DFG). Charts were reviewed for postoperative complications or revisions. RESULTS: Complication rates were lower when fat grafting was performed during the second stage (p = 0.0331). Patients in the DFG cohort required more than one additional revision (p < 0.001) until the completion of reconstruction. Patients in the IFG cohort completed their reconstruction and revisions more than one year earlier than the DFG cohort (p < 0.001). Multivariable regressions showed IFG to be associated with decreased revisions (p < 0.001) and total fat grafting procedures (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that fat grafting at the second stage does not increase overall complication rates, require fewer additional surgeries, and enables patients to reach their desired aesthetic appearance in a shorter time frame. Fewer total surgeries translate not only to a more economical option but also obviate the risk of complications that come with additional surgeries.
BACKGROUND:Patients often pursue revisions following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) to achieve their desired result. Fat grafting is a popular choice for patients and can be performed at second stage reconstruction or at a future date as a revisionary surgery. We investigate the best time to fat graft in IBR by comparing the outcomes of patients who received fat grafting during implant placement with those who pursued fat grafting during a tertiary procedure. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of 157 patients (270 breasts) who underwent immediate two-stage IBR and fat grafting over a five-year period (2012-2016) at our institution. Two cohorts were created based on timing of first fat grafting procedure: immediate (IFG) and delayed (DFG). Charts were reviewed for postoperative complications or revisions. RESULTS: Complication rates were lower when fat grafting was performed during the second stage (p = 0.0331). Patients in the DFG cohort required more than one additional revision (p < 0.001) until the completion of reconstruction. Patients in the IFG cohort completed their reconstruction and revisions more than one year earlier than the DFG cohort (p < 0.001). Multivariable regressions showed IFG to be associated with decreased revisions (p < 0.001) and total fat grafting procedures (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that fat grafting at the second stage does not increase overall complication rates, require fewer additional surgeries, and enables patients to reach their desired aesthetic appearance in a shorter time frame. Fewer total surgeries translate not only to a more economical option but also obviate the risk of complications that come with additional surgeries.