Regional Pain Blocks and Perioperative Pain Control in Patients Undergoing Breast Implant Removal With Capsulectomy.

Background: Demand for breast implant removal is on the rise, with more than 36,000 explants performed in 2020, an increase of 7.5% from previous years. Postoperative (PO) analgesia is an important consideration in this patient group due to scar tissue surrounding the implant and the potential for extensive dissection during capsulectomy. Objectives: The authors sought to compare perioperative pain control between three different types of ultrasound (US)-guided regional anesthetic techniques in patients undergoing implant removal with capsulectomy. Methods: The authors reviewed all patients who received an US-guided block and underwent breast implant removal with capsulectomy at their outpatient surgical center over a 2-year period. They compared intraoperative (IO), PO opioid requirement, and patient-reported pain on the first postoperative day (POD1) between 3 different block techniques using chi-square analysis. A P-value of <.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: A total of 352 patients were included. Twenty-six patients (7.4%) underwent a serratus plane (SP) block, 13 (3.7%) underwent an erector spinae combined with pectointercostal fascial plane (ES + PIFP) block, and 313 (88.9%) underwent an erector spinae combined with pectoral nerve (ES + PECS1) block. ES + PECS1 was associated with less IO and PO opioid use compared with SP and ES + PIFP (1.9% vs 19.2% vs 61.5%, P < .001 for IO, 26.8% vs 34.6% vs 38.5% PO, P < .001). The ES + PECS1 block was associated with mild pain on POD1 compared with the other 2 regional block techniques (P = .001). Conclusions: Regional pain blocks, and specifically the ES block, offer effective pain control for patients undergoing breast implant removal with capsulectomy, demonstrating high patient satisfaction in the PO period with low opioid requirements.

Outcomes of Implant Removal and Capsulectomy for Breast Implant Illness in 248 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Breast implant illness (BII) is a term popularized by social media to describe systemic symptoms that patients ascribe to their breast implants. Though the concept of implants as an underlying cause for a systemic illness remains controversial, few studies have delineated the implant characteristics, capsular histology, and outcomes of patients who undergo explantation for BII. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the demographics, presenting symptoms, outcomes, capsular histology, and culture results of all women who presented to the senior author with symptoms attributed to BII and underwent breast implant removal with capsulectomy from August 2016 to February 2020. Chi-square and logistic regression analyses were performed to evaluate association between implant type, composition, and findings of inflammation on capsule pathology. RESULTS: Among 248 patients, 111 (23%) capsules demonstrated inflammatory changes on permanent pathology. Capsular inflammation was independently associated with silicone versus saline (right odds ratio [OR] = 2.18 [1.16-4.11], P = 0.016, left OR = 2.35 [1.08-5.12], P = 0.03) and textured versus smooth implants (right OR = 2.18 [1.16-4.11], P = 0.016, left OR = 2.25 [1.17-4.31], P = 0.01). Silicone material was present in the capsules of 12 patients (4.8%). Fourteen patients had positive cultures. There was one pneumothorax (0.4%), three hematomas requiring evacuation (1%), and two DVTs (0.8%). Of 228 patients, 206 (90.4%) reported high satisfaction with the outcome of the procedure. CONCLUSIONS: In a large cohort of BII patients, we found that capsular inflammation is significantly associated with silicone and textured implants. Implant removal with capsulectomy can be safely performed in patients with BII with a low complication rate and high patient satisfaction.

Removal of silicone breast implants and review of literature.

Silicone breast implants have a finite life span and may need changing over the lifetime of the patient. The experience with removing first- and second-generation implants is frustrating, because thick capsules often form, in association with rupture and spread of the silicone gel into the surrounding tissue. Different techniques have been employed to try and avoid an unnecessarily large incision, yet still control the dissection so that entire capsule and contained silicone can be removed en bloc. The authors describe a technique that facilitates atraumatic removal using an effective and time-saving vacuum principle.

Acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm): new material in the repair of stoma site hernias.

Parastomal hernias are a common complication after ileostomy or colostomy formation and can lead to complications, such as intestinal obstruction and strangulation. When a parastomal hernia presents, repair of the defect can pose a challenge to the surgeon to choose a repair that both reduces complications and recurrence rates. We present three cases of parastomal hernia repair using acellular dermal matrix (AlloDerm) as reinforcement to the primary hernia repair. We prospectively followed three patients who presented with parastomal hernia after ostomy formation in 2001-2002. The patients underwent repair of the parastomal hernia using primary fascial repair with reinforcement using AlloDerm as an on-lay patch. Two patients were followed for 6 months and 1 year, respectively, and remained hernia-free. One patient presented 8 months later with symptoms of intestinal obstruction that were relieved by nasogastric tube decompression and bowel rest. The patient subsequently returned 3 months later with intestinal obstruction and recurrent parastomal hernia that necessitated an operation for relocation of the stoma and repeat hernia repair. Repair of parastomal hernias using AlloDerm acellular dermal matrix as a substitute for a synthetic graft showed resilience to infection and, more importantly, tolerated exposure in an open wound without having to be removed. Larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to see if this material reduces the incidence of hernia recurrence.

Suspicious findings in reduction mammaplasty specimens: review of 182 consecutive patients.

Breast reduction mammaplasty allows examination of specimens from a seemingly healthy population for the presence of proliferative breast disease. The authors reviewed the charts of all reduction mammaplasty patients of a single surgeon over 7.5 years for age, family history, mammographic results, unilateral or bilateral nature of the procedure, and final pathologic diagnosis. Of 182 patients, 168 had bilateral and 14 had unilateral breast reductions. Ages ranged from 16 to 79 years (average and median: 37 years and 35 years respectively). Fifty-seven patients (31%) were younger than 30 years, 53 patients (29%) were between the ages 30 years and 39 years, for a total of 110 patients (60%) younger than 40 years in this study. A total of 163 patients (89%) had a diagnosis of normal breast tissue. Nineteen patients (10%) had proliferative changes: 9 patients (5%) without atypia, 5 patients (3%) with atypia, 3 patients (2%) with sclerosing adenosis, and 1 patient each (0.5%) with papillomatosis and lobular carcinoma in situ. A total of 95% of patients with proliferative changes were older than 30 years. Women ages 30 to 39 years may be at higher risk (15%) of having proliferative changes than previously reported, and histologic examination of all reduction mammaplasties is recommended.