ABSTRACT
Implant loss is the most severe complication of implant-based breast reconstructions. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of implant loss and other complications, identify associated risk factors, and create a risk model for implant loss. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent a mastectomy, followed by either a two-stage or a direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Patient variables, operative characteristics, and postoperative complications were obtained from the patient records. A multivariate mixed-effects logistic regression model was used to create a risk model for implant loss. RESULTS: A total of 297 implant-based breast reconstructions were evaluated. Overall, the incidence of implant loss was 11.8%. Six risk factors were significantly associated with implant loss: obesity, a bra cup size larger than C, active smoking status, a nipple-preserving procedure, a direct-to-implant reconstruction, and a lower surgeon's volume. A risk model for implant loss was created, showing a predicted risk of 8.4%-13% in the presence of one risk factor, 21.9%-32.5% in the presence of two, 47.5%-59.3% in the presence of three, and over 78.2% in the presence of four risk factors. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of implant loss in this study was 11.8%. Six associated significant risk factors were identified. Our risk model for implant loss revealed that the predicted risk increased over 78.2% when four risk factors were present. This risk model can be used to better inform patients and decrease the risk of implant loss by optimizing surgery using personalized therapy.
ABSTRACT
Excision of the pectoral fascia (PF) is routinely performed in oncological mastectomies. Preservation of the PF may, however, decrease postoperative complication rates for bleeding, infections, and seroma. It may also improve reconstructive outcomes by better prosthesis coverage, thereby reducing implant extrusion rates and improving cosmetic outcomes. METHODS: A systematic review according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis principles was performed. Studies describing PF preservation were searched in 3 databases. All studies including more than 10 patients were included. The main outcomes were oncological safety (local recurrence, regional and distant metastases, and mortality rates), complication rates (bleeding, infections, seroma), loss of the prosthesis after reconstructive surgery, and cosmetic outcomes following reconstruction. RESULTS: Five studies were included. Three reported on 2 different randomized controlled trials (n = 73, and n = 244), and 2 studies were retrospective case series (n = 203 and n = 256). PF preservation did not affect oncological outcomes in terms of local recurrences, regional and distant metastases, or mortality rates. One study described a significantly lower incidence of seroma in the PF preservation group. No differences were found for bleeding complications and infections. No objective data were provided for reconstructive complications or cosmetic outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The literature on PF preservation is scarce. Based on the current evidence, PF preservation seems oncologically safe while potentially reducing postoperative complication rates. It is expected that reconstructive outcomes will benefit from PF preservation, but these studies lack evidence on this topic. Future studies should provide insight into all aspects of PF preservation.
