Skin-Reducing Mastectomy and Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction With Submuscular-Dermal-Mesh Pocket. Issue 1 (January 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bonomi, Stefano; Sala, Laura; Gennaro, Massimiliano; Ricci, Cristian; Cortinovis, Umberto
• Is Part Of: Annals of plastic surgery. Volume 82:Issue 1(2019)
• Publication Date: 2019-01
• Subjects: skin-reducing mastectomy -- one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction -- large ptotic breast -- direct-to-implant breast reconstruction -- skin-sparing mastectomy -- prophylactic mastectomy; Surgery, Plastic -- Periodicals; 617.95205
• DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001614
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0148-7043

Abstract

Abstract : Background: Despite skin-sparing mastectomy techniques have significantly improved reconstructive options and aesthetic outcomes, patients with large and ptotic breasts remain a challenging group to treat satisfactorily. The Wise-pattern skin-reducing mastectomy (SRM) has been designed for this kind of patients but is not without morbidity. To improve safety, the authors reviewed their experience with a modified SRM and immediate 1-stage implant-based breast reconstruction, using a synthetic absorbable mesh combined with a dermal flap. Methods: A retrospective review was undertaken to identify women with medium to large ptotic breast and medium minimally ptotic breast who had undergone SRM and direct-to-implant breast reconstruction using definitive anatomical gel implant, de-epithelialized dermal flap, and absorbable synthetic mesh, between October 2014 and December 2016. Patient demographics were queried, and complication rates, aesthetic outcomes, and patients satisfaction were assessed. Results: Sixty-two procedures of SRM were performed in 56 patients. Forty-five women received contralateral symmetrization. Twenty-one overall complications occurred in 16 patients. Statistical correlation between risk factors and complications onset was assessed. Body mass index resulted the most substantial risk factor ( P = 0.0028) for developing complications, whereas preoperative chemotherapy ( P = 0.0050) and comorbidities ( P = 0.0117) played a decent role. Smoking attitude ( P = 0.1122), age ( P = 0.9990), and implant weight ( P = 0.1583) did not result as significant risk factors. The reconstructive outcomes were good to excellent in 92.8%, with patient satisfaction ranking very to highly satisfied in 84%. Conclusions: The authors' series suggests that SRM with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction can be easily performed when an appropriate SRM pattern is designed, providing complete implant coverage with submuscular-dermal-mesh pocket.