Literature DB >> 34602940

Implant Replacement or Removal: What Happens after Capsular Contracture? A German Study Examining Breast Implant Revision Surgery and Patient Choices in 946 Cases.

Shafreena Kühn1, Mara Anna Georgijewitsch2, Andrej Wehle1, Moritz Billner3, Lara Küenzlen1, Jens Rothenberger1, Ulrich Michael Rieger1.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Capsular contracture most often leads to implant revision surgery for aesthetic or reconstructive purposes. However, little is known about which operation is chosen when revision surgery has to be performed. We performed analysis of revision indications and performed revision surgery considering implant removal or replacement and additional surgical procedures. To our knowledge, this study presents the largest German single-center analysis regarding implant revision surgery after the onset of complications.
METHODS: Retrospective 10-year data analysis of a single-center population undergoing breast implant revision surgery.
RESULTS: Capsular contracture was the most frequent finding before reoperation, both removal and replacement (p < 0.05). It was linked to longer duration of in situ implant placement (p < 0.05) and more frequently in reconstructive patients (p < 0.05). Implant replacement was performed more often before definite implant removal for reconstructive patients (p < 0.05). Mean duration of in situ implant placement before definite removal was lower for reconstructive patients (p = 0.005). Overall reconstructive patients were older than aesthetic patients (p < 0.05). After implant removal, 61.7% of aesthetic patients chose to undergo mastopexy, 54.7% of reconstructive patients opted for autologous breast reconstruction, and 25.4% did not choose an additional surgical procedure after implant removal.
CONCLUSION: Significant differences are observed for reconstructive and aesthetic patients regarding indication leading to revision surgery, time of revision surgery, and the type of performed revision surgery itself. After implant removal, more than 60% of aesthetic patients undergo mastopexy, more than half of reconstructive patients choose autologous breast reconstruction, and over a quarter of patients choose no additional surgical procedures.
Copyright © 2020 by S. Karger AG, Basel.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Breast augmentation; Breast surgery; Capsular contracture; Implants; Mastopexy

Year:  2020        PMID: 34602940      PMCID: PMC8436706          DOI: 10.1159/000509598

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)        ISSN: 1661-3791            Impact factor:   2.268


  31 in total

1.  Aesthetic outcome of breast implant removal in 85 consecutive patients.

Authors:  D T Netscher; S Sharma; J Thornby; M Peltier; A Lyos; M Fater; A Mosharrafa
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Outcomes analysis of patients undergoing autoaugmentation after breast implant removal.

Authors:  Raffi Gurunluoglu; Bulent Sacak; Jamie Arton
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 4.730

3.  Microbial Evaluation in Capsular Contracture of Breast Implants.

Authors:  Marilena Galdiero; Fabio Larocca; Maria Rosaria Iovene; Francesca Martora; Gorizio Pieretti; Virginia D'Oriano; Gianluigi Franci; Giuseppe Ferraro; Francesco d'Andrea; Giovanni Francesco Nicoletti
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2018-01       Impact factor: 4.730

4.  Risk Factor Analysis for Capsular Contracture: A 10-Year Sientra Study Using Round, Smooth, and Textured Implants for Breast Augmentation.

Authors:  M Bradley Calobrace; W Grant Stevens; Peter J Capizzi; Robert Cohen; Tess Godinez; Maggi Beckstrand
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2018-04       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Chemokine CXCL1-Mediated Neutrophil Trafficking in the Lung: Role of CXCR2 Activation.

Authors:  Kirti V Sawant; Renling Xu; Robert Cox; Hal Hawkins; Elena Sbrana; Deepthi Kolli; Roberto P Garofalo; Krishna Rajarathnam
Journal:  J Innate Immun       Date:  2015-07-01       Impact factor: 7.349

6.  Not All Breast Implants Are Equal: A 13-Year Review of Implant Longevity and Reasons for Explantation.

Authors:  Aaron C Van Slyke; Michael Carr; Nicholas J Carr
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2018-09       Impact factor: 4.730

7.  Prospective analysis of psychosocial outcomes in breast reconstruction: one-year postoperative results from the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study.

Authors:  E G Wilkins; P S Cederna; J C Lowery; J A Davis; H M Kim; R S Roth; S Goldfarb; P H Izenberg; H P Houin; K W Shaheen
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2000-10       Impact factor: 4.730

Review 8.  Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma.

Authors:  P Rastogi; A K Deva; H Miles Prince
Journal:  Curr Hematol Malig Rep       Date:  2018-12       Impact factor: 3.952

Review 9.  Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Ashley N Leberfinger; Brittany J Behar; Nicole C Williams; Kevin L Rakszawski; John D Potochny; Donald R Mackay; Dino J Ravnic
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 14.766

10.  Ten-year results from the Natrelle 410 anatomical form-stable silicone breast implant core study.

Authors:  G Patrick Maxwell; Bruce W Van Natta; Bradley P Bengtson; Diane K Murphy
Journal:  Aesthet Surg J       Date:  2015-02       Impact factor: 4.283

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.