The infected or exposed breast implant: management and treatment strategies

Among the potential complications associated with the use of breast implants are the risks of periprosthetic infection and device extrusion. There is little published information about the effective management of these situations. Conservative recommendations include antibiotic therapy and removal of the implant until resolution of the infection or until the wound has healed. A retrospective review identified patients with periprosthetic infection or threatened or actual device exposure treated by the senior author. Twenty-four patients encompassing 26 affected prostheses were available for review and were classified into seven groups based on initial presentation as follows: group 1, mild infection (n = 8); group 2, severe infection (n = 4); group 3, threatened exposure without infection (n = 3); group 4, threatened exposure with mild infection (n = 3); group 5, threatened exposure with severe infection (n = 1); group 6, actual exposure without clinical infection (n = 5); and group 7, actual exposure with infection (n = 2). To salvage the prosthesis in these patients, various treatment strategies were utilized. All patients with a suspected infection or device exposure were started immediately on appropriate antibiotic therapy (oral antibiotics for mild infections and parenteral antibiotics for severe infections). Salvage methods included one or more of the following: antibiotic therapy, débridement, curettage, pulse lavage, capsulectomy, device exchange, primary closure, and/or flap coverage. Twenty (76.9 percent) of 26 threatened implants with infection or threatened or actual prosthesis exposure were salvaged after aggressive intervention. The presence of severe infection adversely affected the salvage rate in this series. A statistically significant difference exists among those patients without infection or with mild infection only (groups 1, 3, 4, and 6); successful salvage was achieved in 18 (94.7 percent) of 19 patients, whereas only two of seven of those implants with severe infection (groups 2, 5, and 7) were salvaged (p = 0.0017). Ten (90.9 percent) of 11 devices with threatened or actual exposure, not complicated by severe infection (groups 3, 4, and 6), were salvaged. Several treatment strategies were developed for periprosthetic infection and for threatened or actual implant exposure. Patients with infection were placed on oral or intravenous antibiotics; those who responded completely required no further treatment. For persistent mild infection or threatened or actual exposure, operative intervention was required, including some or all of the following steps: implant removal, pocket curettage, partial or total capsulectomy, débridement, site change, placement of a new implant, and/or flap coverage; the menu of options varied with the precise circumstances. No immediate salvage was attempted in five cases, due to either severe infection, nonresponding infection with gross purulence, marginal tissues, or lack of options for healthy tissue coverage. Based on the authors' experience, salvage attempts for periprosthetic infection and prosthesis exposure may be successful, except in cases of overwhelming infection or deficient soft-tissue coverage. Although an attempt at implant salvage may be offered to a patient, device removal and delayed reinsertion will always remain a more conservative and predictable option.     

Capsular contracture in silicone gel and saline-filled breast implants after reconstruction

Comparisons between results with randomly allotted silicone-gel and saline-filled prostheses in breast reconstruction after mastectomy led to the following conclusions. Neither prosthesis type is ideal. Leakage from saline-filled implants occurred in 2 of the 37 implants, with resultant deflation. Silicone prostheses had a significantly higher rate of capsular contracture [surgeon's evaluation: 54 percent capsular contracture for silicone-gel compared with 20 percent for saline-filled prostheses (p = 0.006); patients' evaluation for the same figures: 54 percent compared with 29 percent (p = 0.03)]. Other authors have shown the presence of silicone in the tissue around silicone-gel-filled silicone implants, but less or none around saline-filled silicone implants. Since the only difference between the two groups was the randomly allotted implants, we assume that the free silicone around silicone-gel-filled prostheses is the major cause of capsular contracture. Since the saline-filled implants showed a 20 percent capsular contracture rate, there could be other causes of capsular contracture in this study. For prevention of contracture, improved implant encapsulation and use of a less reactive filling substance seem to offer possibilities. Surgical technique should aim to preserve the integrity of the prosthesis.     

Breast reconstruction using an inflatable breast implant with detachable reservoir

An inflatable breast implant having a detachable filling reservoir is described. Once in position, the implant can be filled under controlled conditions postoperatively. The implant functions either as a tissue expander or as a delayed-filling implant in the initial stages of the procedure. Once the desired breast size is achieved, the reservoir is removed, leaving the filled implant in position. This implant has been used successfully in various types of breast reconstructive procedures, including both primary and secondary reconstruction following modified mastectomy, immediate reconstruction following subcutaneous mastectomy, secondary reconstruction following radical mastectomy combined with the latissimus dorsi flap, and following the removal of silicone gel implants with associated capsular contracture. A total of 23 patients, representing 34 breasts, are reported on. The results have been encouraging over a period of 20 months of follow-up.     

Breast reconstruction using tissue expanders and implants in Hodgkin's patients with prior mantle irradiation.

Women treated for Hodgkin's disease with mantle irradiation have an increased risk for developing breast cancer. Typically, breast malignancy in Hodgkin's patients presents bilaterally in a younger age group. Skin flap ischemia, poor skin expansion, implant extrusion, capsular contracture, and poor cosmesis are common sequelae of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction after breast irradiation for failed breast conservation therapy. This has led most surgeons to favor autologous tissue reconstruction in this setting. This study was performed to determine the efficacy of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients who have been treated with prior mantle irradiation for Hodgkin's disease. A retrospective analysis of all breast cancer patients with a history of Hodgkin's disease and mantle irradiation treated with mastectomy and tissue expander/implant reconstruction between 1992 and 1999 was performed. There were seven patients, with a mean age of 35 years (range, 28 to 42 years). The average interval between mantle irradiation and breast cancer diagnosis was 16 years (range, 12 to 23 years). All patients underwent two-stage reconstruction. Textured surface tissue expanders were placed in a complete submuscular position at the time of mastectomy. Expansion was initiated 2 weeks after insertion and continued on a weekly basis until completion. Expanders were replaced with textured surface saline-filled implants as a second stage. Patients were evaluated for skin flap ischemia, infection, quality of skin expansion, implant extrusion, capsular contracture, rippling, symmetry, and final aesthetic outcome. Breast cancer was bilateral in five patients and unilateral in two. Two patients did not undergo simultaneous bilateral breast reconstruction because of metachronous cancer development. One of the patients had an initial transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap breast reconstruction, followed by a tissue expander/implant reconstruction of the opposite breast. The average follow-up was 3 years. Complications were limited to one case of cellulitis after implant placement that resolved with intravenous antibiotics. There were no cases of skin flap ischemia, poor skin expansion, or implant extrusion. Overall patient satisfaction was high and revisions were not requested or required. Symmetry was best achieved with bilateral implants. This study demonstrates the efficacy of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction in patients treated with prior mantle irradiation. In this series, tissue expansion was reliable with low morbidity. Second-stage placement of permanent implants yielded good aesthetic results without significant capsular contracture. Mantle irradiation did not appear to compromise the prosthetic breast reconstruction. Tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction should remain a viable option in this category of irradiated patients.     

Immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expansion

Between October of 1983 and June of 1985, 31 patients underwent primary breast reconstruction with tissue expansion. Tissue expansion was utilized for breast reconstruction when the remaining muscle and skin following modified radical mastectomy was insufficient to accommodate a prosthesis that matched in size and shape the opposite breast. All expanders were placed beneath an investing muscular pocket created by elevating the pectoralis major and serratus anterior. Postoperative expansion began within 1 week, and the breast was expanded to double the volume of the opposite breast. Twenty-two patients have completed their reconstruction with a mean follow-up in 7 months. There were nine complications, including five deflations and four infections. All patients have remained Baker I or Baker II. Creating ptosis to match the breast was accomplished by placing the expander below the rectus fascia and superiorly advancing this expanded tissue at the time of prosthesis placement. Primary breast reconstruction with tissue expansion following modified radical mastectomy is safe, simple, and produces a breast with excellent shape, size, texture, and patient satisfaction.     

Use of a permanent tissue expander for breast reconstruction

The use of tissue expansion in breast reconstruction is a recognized alternative surgical approach. The second generation of tissue-expanding prostheses is the permanent reverse double-lumen expander. In a series of 100 breast reconstructions using a permanent tissue expander, the clinical benefits of producing a moderate degree of mound ptosis along with observed reduction in pain during expansion are discussed. Additional advantages to the use of the device are the cost savings realized, elimination of a second procedure and a second anesthetic exposure, and a high degree of patient acceptance and satisfaction. This study includes breast reconstruction following mastectomies for malignant and premalignant disease, as demonstrated in 75 delayed and 25 immediate reconstructions, with the longest follow-up being 3 years. Complications of infection (3 percent), significant capsular contracture (4 percent), and implant failure (3 percent) are the most frequent and major complications observed yet. In no instance was breast reconstruction rendered unachievable in the face of these complications. The demonstrated results achieved with permanent tissue-expanding prosthesis, complemented by the obvious benefits and a low rate of significant complications, endorse this method as a viable alternative approach in reconstructive breast surgery.     

Capsular contracture after breast reconstruction with silicone-gel and saline-filled implants: a 6-year follow-up

A major problem after breast reconstruction with augmentation mammaplasty is contracture of the fibrous capsule around the prosthesis. In a series of 72 breasts in 65 women, silicone-gel and saline-filled implants were randomly selected prior to breast reconstruction. The results were judged with respect to consistency, tenderness, wrinkles, and sounds by two independent plastic surgeons according to the breast augmentation classification (BAC) and by the patients themselves. Capsular contracture was found by the surgeons in 50 percent of the gel implant group and in 16 percent of the saline implant group, which is in conformity with the results of the follow-up 5 years earlier. The incidence of deflation was 16 percent in the saline group and occurred in different sizes of both overinflated and underinflated prostheses. The degree of slow leakage from saline implants will be discussed. Despite the high rate of contractures in the gel group, 85 percent of all patients were satisfied with the result of the reconstruction.     

Capsular contracture around saline-filled fine textured and smooth mammary implants: a prospective 7.5-year follow-up.

In a previous prospective randomized clinical study comparing in the same patient textured and smooth saline-filled mammary implants (Biocell) with large pore size (300 to 600 microm), we saw no difference in capsular contracture. This study was undertaken in a similar way to compare capsular contracture around smooth and textured saline-filled prostheses with pores of small size. During a period of 7.5 years, the breast hardness was followed up, and at the end of the study patient satisfaction was evaluated.Twenty healthy women with a mean age of 30 years were operated on for breast augmentation. Two surgeons performed all operations in a standardized way. Each patient received subglandularly a Siltex textured saline-filled prosthesis with a pore size of 30 to 70 microm in one breast, and a smooth saline-filled prosthesis in the other. The hardness of the breasts was evaluated after 0.5, 1, and 7.5 years using Baker grading and applanation tonometry. Eighteen patients completed 1-year and 7.5-year follow-up. Two breasts with smooth prostheses were contracted after 6 months (Baker III or IV). After 1 year, four patients with smooth prostheses and one with a textured prosthesis had capsular contracture (p = 0.34). Seven and one-half years after surgery, six patents with smooth and four with textured implants had contracture (p = 0.66). On two patients with smooth prostheses and one patient with a textured prosthesis, the capsule around the implant hardened between 6 and 12 months. Between 1 year and 7.5 years, three breasts with smooth and textured implants contracted and one with a textured implant softened.The patients reported on a Visual Analogue Scale (1 to 10) the impact of the augmentation on their quality of life to be 9 +/- 1. Four patients preferred the breast with the smooth prosthesis, three preferred the breast with the textured prosthesis, and the others found both breasts equal. This study showed no significant difference of contracture with smooth versus fine textured implants. The majority of the patients preferred the smooth implants. The patients reported that the breast augmentation had had an extremely high impact on their quality of life.     

Staged breast reconstruction with saline-filled implants in the irradiated breast: recent trends and therapeutic implications

A retrospective review was performed of one surgeon's experience with 40 consecutive patients who had undergone two-stage saline-filled implant breast reconstruction and radiation during the period from 1990 through 1997. A randomly selected group of 40 other two-stage saline-filled implant breast reconstructions from the same surgeon and time period served as controls. This review was undertaken because of the absence of specific information on the outcome of staged saline implant reconstructions in the radiated breast. Previously published reports on silicone gel implants and radiation have been contradictory. At the same time, the criteria for the use of radiation in the treatment of breast cancer have been expanded and the numbers of reconstruction patients who have been radiated are increasing dramatically. For example, in a 1985 report on immediate breast reconstruction, only 1 of 185 patients over a 6-year period underwent adjuvant radiation therapy, whereas in this review, there were 40 radiated breasts with saline-filled implants, 19 of which received adjuvant radiation therapy during their expansion. The study parameters included patient age, breast cup size, implant size, length of follow-up, number of procedures, coincident flap operations, Baker classification, complications, opposite breast procedures, pathologic stage, indications for and details about the radiation, and outcomes. The use of radiation in this review of reconstructed breasts can logically be divided into four groups: previous lumpectomy and radiation (n = 7), mastectomy and radiation before reconstruction (n = 9), mastectomy and adjuvant radiation during reconstruction/expansion (n = 19), and radiation after reconstruction (n = 5). The largest and most rapidly growing group of patients is of those receiving postmastectomy adjuvant radiation therapy. A total of 47.5 percent (19 of 40) of radiated breasts with saline implants ultimately needed the addition of, or replacement by, a flap. Ten percent of a control group with nonradiated saline implant reconstructions also had flaps, none as replacements. Fifty percent or more of both the radiated and control groups had contralateral surgery. Complications were far more common in the radiated group; for example, there were 32.5 percent capsular contractures compared with none in the control group. The control nonradiated implant-only group and the flap plus implant radiated group did well cosmetically. The radiated implant-only group was judged the worst. The increasing use of radiation after mastectomy has important implications for breast reconstruction. The possibility for radiation should be thoroughly investigated and anticipated preoperatively before immediate breast reconstruction. Patients with invasive disease, particularly with large tumors or palpable axillary lymph nodes, are especially likely to be encouraged to undergo postmastectomy radiation therapy. The indications for adjuvant radiation therapy have included four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, tumors 4 cm (or more) in diameter, and tumors at or near the margin of resection. More recently, some centers are recommending adjuvant radiation therapy for patients with as few as one positive lymph node or even in situ carcinoma close to the resection margin. The use of latissimus dorsi flaps after radiation has proven to be an excellent solution to postradiation tissue contracture, which can occur during breast expander reconstruction. The use of the latissimus flap electively with skin-sparing mastectomy preradiation is probably unwise, unless postmastectomy radiation is unlikely. Skin-sparing mastectomy with a latissimus flap thus should be preserved for patients unlikely to undergo adjuvant radiation therapy. Purely autologous reconstruction such as a TRAM flap is another option for these patients, either before or after radiation therapy.     

Polyurethane implants: a 6-year review of 416 patients

The author reviews 6 years of experience and 416 patients in whom polyurethane implants were used for augmentation and reconstruction of the breast. As with many other plastic surgeons, early use was confined to "salvage cases." Owing to the impressive results, use was extended to routine augmentation. Polyurethane implants are now used exclusively for aesthetic breast surgery. Results are evaluated for replacement of gel capsules and simple and radical mastectomy reconstruction. Gel capsules (Baker stages III to IV), in which prostheses were removed and replaced with polyurethane-covered implants, improved in 29 of 32 patients (87 percent). For reconstruction, placement of polyurethane implants in unscarred situations gives far superior results than following repeated procedures. The incidence of infection is no higher than with gel implants. Removal without capsulectomy was not a problem in most instances. However, on two recent occasions capsulectomy was extremely difficult.     

The premature removal of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction.

The role of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction is well established. Little information exists, however, regarding the incidence and etiology of premature removal of the tissue expander before planned exchange to a permanent breast implant. The purpose of this study was to review our 10-year experience with tissue expander breast reconstruction and identify factors relating to the premature removal of the tissue expander. This study is a retrospective review of 770 consecutive patients who underwent breast reconstruction with tissue expanders over the past 10 years. Breast reconstruction was immediate in 90 percent of patients. Patients were expanded weekly, and adjuvant chemotherapy was begun during the expansion process when required. Factors potentially affecting premature expander removal (chemotherapy, diabetes, obesity, radiation therapy, and smoking) were evaluated. Fourteen patients (1.8 percent) with a mean age of 47 years (range, 38 to 62 years) required premature removal of their tissue expander. Expanders were removed a mean of 3.2 months (0.1 to 8 months) after insertion. Causes for premature removal of the tissue expander included infection (7 patients), exposure (2), skin necrosis (2), patient dissatisfaction (2), and persistent breast cancer (1). Positive wound cultures were obtained in four of the seven infected patients (57 percent), requiring expander removal for infection. Tissue expanders were removed in 11 patients for complications directly related to the expander. Among these, six (55 percent) were receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, and one was a smoker. Diabetes, obesity, other concomitant medical illnesses, and prior mantle irradiation were not associated with expander removal. Premature removal of the tissue expander was required in only 1.8 percent of the patients in this series. Infection was the most common complication necessitating an unplanned surgical procedure to remove the expander. This study demonstrates that the use of tissue expanders in breast reconstruction is reliable, with the vast majority of patients completing the expansion process.     

Complete one-stage,immediate breast reconstruction with prosthetic material in patients with large or ptotic breasts

Immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction is a relatively simple, quick procedure with no donor site morbidity. This report discusses immediate one-stage breast reconstruction using prostheses in 18 patients (19 breasts) who also required a contralateral reduction or mastopexy. In all cases, an inverted-T pattern was applied to both breasts. The mean age of the patients was 49 years (range, 32 to 62 years), and the mean size of the gel implant used was 330 ml (range, 120 to 550 ml); the implant was inserted in a total submuscular pocket in seven patients and subcutaneously in 11 patients. In two patients with multiple risk factors, the prosthesis extruded, and one patient required removal for a periprosthetic infection. In 10 patients with early stage disease (T1 or T2) with tumors more than 5 cm from the nipple-areola complex, the original areola (n = 3) or nipple-areola complex (n = 7) was retained as a full-thickness skin graft.The breast shape after submuscular prosthesis insertion is different than that of the contralateral breast after a mastopexy or reduction, and nipple-areola complex symmetry was difficult to obtain; thus, this technique was abandoned in favor of the subcutaneous position (using a modified Wise keyhole pattern with a de-epithelialized portion, which still allows two-layer closure).In the subgroup of patients with large breasts or marked ptosis, a single-stage breast reconstruction procedure can be performed with symmetrical incisions. The subcutaneous position allows for symmetrical shape and nipple-areola complex symmetry to be obtained. When the tumors are small and situated in the periphery of the breast, the nipple-areola complex may be retained as a full-thickness graft.     

Technical aspects and outcome after prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction in 30 consecutive high-risk patients

The purpose of this study was to evaluate a consecutive series of patients operated on with prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with implants, focusing on preoperative assessment, technical aspects of surgical outcome, and number of postoperative complications on a short-term basis. Thirty consecutive healthy women with an increased risk of breast cancer who were therefore operated on with bilateral prophylactic mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction are reported. A multidisciplinary approach with a geneticist, general surgeon, plastic surgeon, specially trained nurse, psychologist, gynecologist, and oncologist was used preoperatively, with thorough information provided to the patient about the surgery. Eleven patients had gene mutations, and in all patients, the geneticist had performed a risk assessment. The mean age of the patients was 41 years. The technique was modified over time with smaller or special incisions and tailor-made adjustments for each patient. Great care was taken to remove all breast tissue. The tops of the breast nipples were regrafted for cosmetic purposes, and the base was sent for histopathologic examination. In most cases, permanent expander prostheses with detachable valves were used. The areolas were tattooed, if they were not left in place. No patient had occult cancer or carcinoma in situ. Four postoperative complications occurred, including two hematomas, one infection (treated with antibiotics), and one pneumothorax in a patient with severe asthma. All reconstructions were fulfilled. The mean hospital stay was 5.7 days. The time from mastectomy to the final tattooing of the areolas was 260 days. All patients returned to normal daily activities after fulfilled reconstruction.     

Irradiation after immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: outcomes, complications, aesthetic results, and satisfaction among 156 patients

Chest wall irradiation is becoming increasingly common for mastectomy patients who have opted for immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders and implants. The optimal approach for such patients has not yet been defined. This study assesses the outcomes of a reconstruction protocol for patients who require irradiation after tissue expander/implant reconstruction. The charts of all patients who underwent immediate tissue expander/implant reconstruction at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between January of 1995 and June of 2001 and who had not previously undergone irradiation were retrospectively reviewed. A subgroup of patients who required chest wall irradiation after mastectomy and reconstruction was identified. Those patients were treated according to the following treatment algorithm: (1) reconstruction with tissue expander placement at the time of mastectomy , (2) tissue expansion during postoperative chemotherapy, (3) exchange of the tissue expander for a permanent implant approximately 4 weeks after the completion of chemotherapy, and (4) chest wall irradiation beginning 4 weeks after the exchange. All irradiated patients with at least 1 year of follow-up monitoring after the completion of radiotherapy were evaluated with respect to aesthetic outcomes, capsular contracture, and patient satisfaction. A control group of nonirradiated patients was randomly selected from the cohort of patients treated during the study period. During the 5-year study period, a total of 687 patients underwent immediate reconstruction with tissue expanders. Eighty-one patients underwent postoperative irradiation after placement of the final implant. A total of 68 patients who received postoperative chest wall irradiation underwent at least 1 year of follow-up monitoring after the completion of radiotherapy, with a mean follow-up period of 34 months. Seventy-five nonirradiated patients were evaluated as a control group. Overall, 68 percent of the irradiated patients developed capsular contracture, compared with 40 percent in the nonirradiated group (p = 0.025). Eighty percent of the irradiated patients demonstrated acceptable (good to excellent) aesthetic results, compared with 88 percent in the nonirradiated group (p = not significant). Sixty-seven percent of the irradiated patients were satisfied with their reconstructions, compared with 88 percent of the nonirradiated patients (p = 0.004). Seventy-two percent of the irradiated patients stated that they would choose the same form of reconstruction again, compared with 85 percent of the nonirradiated patients. The results of this study suggest that tissue expander/implant reconstruction is an acceptable surgical option even when followed by postoperative radiotherapy and should be considered in the reconstruction algorithm for all patients, particularly those who may not be candidates for autogenous reconstruction.     

Muscle-flap coverage of exposed endoprostheses

A well-entrenched tenet in the orthopedic community is that dehiscent wounds overlying exposed endoprostheses should be treated by implant removal and delayed reconstruction. A new management protocol utilizing thorough soft-tissue debridement and myocutaneous or muscle-flap coverage was evaluated in four patients at the UCLA Medical Center who presented with exposed endoprostheses. These prostheses were placed for total-joint replacement or limb salvage surgery. All four prostheses and extremities were salvaged without the need for endoprosthesis removal or exchange, and no infections developed. The results suggest that late aseptic wound dehiscence with an exposed endoprosthesis need not be managed with prosthetic removal, arthrodesis, or amputation. This one-stage procedure avoided infection, allowed early mobilization, and shortened hospitalization.     

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

In the past decade, changing attitudes toward breast reconstruction among both patients and providers have led a growing number of women to seek breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Although investigators have documented the psychological, social, emotional, and functional benefits of breast reconstruction, little research has evaluated the effects of procedure choice on these outcomes. The current study prospectively evaluated and compared psychosocial outcomes for three common options for mastectomy reconstruction: tissue expander/implant, pedicle TRAM, and free TRAM techniques. In a prospective cohort design, patients undergoing postmastectomy reconstruction for the first time with expander/implant, pedicle TRAM, or free TRAM procedures were recruited from 12 centers and 23 plastic surgeons in the United States and Canada. Before reconstruction and at 1 year after reconstruction, patients were evaluated by a battery of questionnaires consisting of both generic and condition-specific surveys. Outcomes assessed included emotional well-being, vitality, general mental health, social functioning, functional well-being, social well-being, and body image. Baseline (preoperative) scores and the change in scores (the difference between postoperative and preoperative scores) were compared across procedure types using t tests and analysis of covariance. Preoperative and 1-year postoperative surveys were obtained from 273 patients. Procedure type was reported in 250 patients, of whom 56 received implant reconstructions, 128 pedicle TRAM flaps, and 66 free TRAM flaps. A total of 161 immediate and 89 delayed reconstructions were performed. Among women receiving immediate reconstruction, significant improvements were observed in all psychosocial variables except body image. However, no significant effects of procedure type on these changes over time existed. Similarly, delayed reconstruction patients had significant increases in emotional well-being, vitality, general mental health, functional well-being, and body image. Although the choice of reconstructive technique did not significantly impact most of these outcomes, significant differences existed among procedure types for three psychosocial subscales. Patients undergoing delayed expander/implant reconstructions reported greater improvements in vitality and social well-being relative to women receiving delayed TRAM procedures. By contrast, delayed TRAM patients noted significantly greater gains in body image compared with women choosing delayed expander-implant reconstruction. The authors conclude that both immediate and delayed breast reconstructions provide substantial psychosocial benefits for mastectomy patients. Although the choice of reconstructive procedure does not seem to significantly affect improvements in psychosocial status with immediate reconstruction, our data suggest that procedure type does have a significant effect on gains in vitality and body image for women undergoing delayed reconstruction.     

Delayed-immediate breast reconstruction

In patients with early-stage breast cancer who are scheduled to undergo mastectomy and desire breast reconstruction, the optimal timing of reconstruction depends on whether postmastectomy radiation therapy will be needed. Immediate reconstruction offers the best aesthetic outcomes if postmastectomy radiation therapy is not needed, but if postmastectomy radiation therapy is required, delayed reconstruction is preferable to avoid potential aesthetic and radiation-delivery problems. Unfortunately, the need for postmastectomy radiation therapy cannot be reliably determined until review of the permanent tissue sections. The authors recently implemented a two-stage approach, delayed-immediate breast reconstruction, to optimize reconstruction in patients at risk for requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy when the need for postmastectomy radiation therapy is not known at the time of mastectomy. Stage 1 consists of skin-sparing mastectomy with insertion of a completely filled textured saline tissue expander. After review of permanent sections, patients who did not require post-mastectomy radiation therapy underwent immediate reconstruction (stage 2) and patients who required postmastectomy radiation therapy completed postmastectomy radiation therapy and then underwent standard delayed reconstruction. In this study, the feasibility and outcomes of this approach were reviewed. Fourteen patients were treated with delayed-immediate reconstruction between May of 2002 and June of 2003. Twelve patients had unilateral reconstruction and two patients had bilateral reconstruction, for a total of 16 treated breasts. All patients completed stage 1. Tissue expanders were inserted subpectorally in 15 breasts and subcutaneously in one breast. The mean intraoperative expander fill volume was 475 cc (range, 250 to 750 cc). Three patients required postmastectomy radiation therapy and underwent delayed reconstruction. Eleven patients did not require postmastectomy radiation therapy. Nine patients had 11 breast reconstructions (stage 2), six with free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flaps, one with a superior gluteal artery perforator flap, and four with a latissimus dorsi flap plus an implant. The median interval between stages was 13 days (range, 11 to 22 days). Two patients who did not require postmastectomy radiation therapy have not yet had stage 2 reconstruction, one because she wished to delay reconstruction and the other because she required additional tissue expansion before permanent implant placement. Six complications occurred. The stage 1 complications involved two cases of mastectomy skin necrosis in patients who required post-mastectomy radiation therapy; one patient required removal of the subcutaneously placed expander before postmastectomy radiation therapy and the other patient had a subpectorally placed expander that only required local wound care. The stage 2 complications were a recipient-site seroma in a patient with a latissimus dorsi flap, a recipient-site hematoma in the patient with the superior gluteal artery perforator flap, and two arterial thromboses in patients with TRAM flaps. Both TRAM flaps were salvaged. Delayed-immediate reconstruction is technically feasible and safe in patients with early-stage breast cancer who may require postmastectomy radiation therapy. With this approach, patients who do not require postmastectomy radiation therapy can achieve aesthetic outcomes essentially the same as those with immediate reconstruction, and patients who require postmastectomy radiation therapy can avoid the aesthetic and radiation-delivery problems that can occur after an immediate breast reconstruction.     

The coincidence of TRAM flaps and prostheses in the setting of breast reconstruction

It is well known that transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flaps can be used to replace unsatisfactory prosthetic breast reconstructions; however, little has been written about the scope of breast implant use in TRAM flap patients. In this study, to ascertain the range of such therapeutic options, their frequency, and their clinical outcomes, the authors retrospectively reviewed the senior author's breast reconstruction experience from 1989 to 2000 with patients in whom both a TRAM flap and an implant were used for breast reconstruction. The authors examined the surgical indications, body habitus, bra size, chest wall irradiation history, flap type, implant type, complications, and outcomes for those patients with TRAM flap and breast implant combinations.Thirty-two women who had 50 (various) combinations of a TRAM flap and a breast implant were identified. There were more clinical scenarios than patients because many of the women had multiple scenarios. The 50 combination scenarios were then divided into six groups. Group I consisted of 14 patients who had elective prostheses placed beneath simultaneous TRAM flaps; group II consisted of 10 patients who had TRAM flaps with contralateral prosthetic reconstruction (in which two implants were received before the TRAM flaps, five implants were received simultaneously with the TRAM flaps, and three implants were received after the TRAM flaps); group III consisted of eight patients who had contralateral augmentation in addition to their TRAM flaps; group IV consisted of 11 patients who had TRAM flaps that were used to cover or replace previous prosthetic reconstructions; group V consisted of four patients in whom prostheses were used to augment or improve previous TRAM flap reconstructions; and group VI consisted of three patients who required prostheses to either reconstruct or salvage total or near-total TRAM flap failures. A broad range of implant types was used, although anatomic saline implants predominated. Forty-one percent of the patients in the review had undergone irradiation during the course of their treatment for breast cancer. Eight of the 32 patients experienced a total of twelve complications, four of which were related to the implants and eight of which involved the TRAM flaps and abdominal donor sites.Although complex, the wide variety of potential TRAM flap/breast implant combinations can be useful for patients with challenging reconstructive scenarios, particularly those that involve radiation therapy. In the group of patients reviewed by the authors, TRAM flaps were most often used in successful partnership either on the same side as or opposite to an implant reconstruction. A TRAM flap was used to salvage or replace an unsatisfactory implant reconstruction in less than a third of the patients. From a risk point of view, implants used opposite a TRAM flap reconstruction had a lower incidence of complication than did implants used beneath TRAM flaps.     

Long-term use of polyurethane breast prostheses: a 14-year experience

I have used polyurethane prostheses for the past 14 years, implanting 220 implants into 130 patients who desired breast reconstruction after subcutaneous mastectomy or cancer ablation or simply breast augmentation. I theorize that a polyurethane-covered implant resists contracture, retaining its compressibility because the fibroblasts proliferate into the polyurethane in many different directions. When the fibrils contract, the forces of contracture counterbalance one another, resisting contracture. However, when smooth prostheses are implanted, fibrils are directed in a circular fashion around the implant and naturally contract, leading to firmer breasts. There were 115 prostheses inserted following subcutaneous mastectomy, and 22 percent developed contracted capsules. Seven implants became exposed because of skin necroses; one was removed because of a Staphylococcus infection; and two patients developed a combination of polyurethane and silicone granulomas. These developed only with the earlier implant, where there was shedding of the polyurethane sponge layer and silicone bled from the low-viscosity silicone used in the earlier implants. No granulomas were noted with the currently used Surgitek Replicon implant. Eighty-five breasts were reconstructed after cancer ablation with polyurethane implants, and the contracture rate was 2.3 percent. Other complications were minimal. A smaller group of patients had augmentation mammaplasty, and 20 prostheses were placed in 10 patients. A 15 percent contracture rate was noted in this group. In this study, 82 percent of patients were followed for up to 14 years. Capsular contractures occurred in 30 implants between 1 and 11 years, for an average recurrence at 6.3 years. The overall contracture rate was 13 percent. Other complications were minimal. All implants were placed subcutaneously or subglandularly, and all were drained.     

Influence of some operative and postoperative factors on capsular contracture around breast prostheses.

In a follow-up of 490 patients with breast implants, neither the size of the prosthesis nor the nature of the surgical procedure (simple augmentation mammaplasty or after subcutaneous mastectomy) increased the incidence of capsular contracture. Hematoma or infection were followed by a higher incidence of capsular contracture. Drainage with suction and the instillation of steroid around the prostheses seemed to be effective in reducing the incidence of capsular contracture. In the steroid-treated group, the need for open surgical treatment was reduced. The recurrence rate after closed capsulotomy, or open capsulotomy, was not significantly different from that following the more extensive procedure of capsulectomy.