Reduced Pain and Accelerated Recovery Following Primary Breast Augmentation With Lightweight Breast Implants.

BACKGROUND: The posttreatment pain associated with breast augmentation is a top concern of most patients and can affect the decision concerning surgery. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to compare the posttreatment pain and recovery times of patients undergoing primary breast augmentation with lightweight vs full-mass implants of similar volumes. The authors hypothesized that the reduced mechanical strain applied by lightweight implants elicits less pain. METHODS: In this retrospective, observational study, 100 women who had undergone primary breast augmentation with either a lightweight breast implant or a traditional full-mass silicone implant (n = 50), were contacted by phone and asked about their posttreatment experiences and overall satisfaction with the outcome. All women were treated by the same surgical team, and the two groups were matched by date of surgery. RESULTS: Most patients in the two cohorts had a self-reported preoperative B cup size and relatively high tolerance to pain. On average, LWBI patients were 6 years older than those undergoing full-mass implantation (32.4 ± 8.7 vs 26.2 ± 8.0; P = .0004) and more had experienced at least one pregnancy (61.2% vs 24%, P = .0002). LWBI patients opted for implants 39 ± 28.4 cc larger than patients in the control group. Subglandular placement was selected in most cases (LWBI: 83.7% and full-mass: 90.0%). Mean posttreatment pain was lower in the LWBI cohort (5.5 ± 2.4 vs 6.5 ± 2.4) and required a shorter duration of analgesics (3.87 ± 1.77 days vs 5.26 ± 2.94 days; P = .009). Age- and parity-adjusted measures demonstrated a respective 2-day and 5-day shorter recovery period and return to normal activities interval in the LWBI versus full-mass implant cohorts (P = .04 and P = .002, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: As compared to traditional silicone filled full-mass implants, breast augmentations with B-Lite lightweight breast implants (G&G Biotechnology Ltd., Haifa, Israel) elicit less posttreatment pain and require less down-time, ultimately, meeting patients' quest for desired breast shape at minimal discomfort.

Lightweight breast implants: a novel solution for breast augmentation and reconstruction mammaplasty.

Breast augmentation and reconstruction mammaplasty have been in practice for decades and are highly prevalent surgeries performed worldwide. While overall patient satisfaction is high, common long-term effects include breast tissue atrophy, accelerated ptosis and inframammary fold breakdown. Increasing evidence attributes these events to the durative loading and compressive forces introduced by the breast implants. Mechanical challenges exceeding the elastic capacity of the breast tissue components, eventually lead to irreversible tissue stretching, directly proportional to the introduced mass. Thus, it is suggested that, contrary to long-standing dogmas, implant weight, rather than its volume, stands at the basis of future tissue compromise and deformation. A novel lightweight implant has been developed to address the drawbacks of traditional breast implants, which demonstrate equivalence between their size and weight. The B-Lite(®) breast implant (G&G Biotechnology Ltd., Haifa, Israel) design allows for a reduction in implant weight of up to 30%, while maintaining the size, form, and function of traditional breast implants. The CE-marked device can be effectively implanted using standard of care procedures and has been established safe for human use. Implantation of the B-Lite(®) breast implant is projected to significantly reduce the inherent strains imposed by standard implants, thereby conserving tissue stability and integrity over time. In summary, this novel, lightweight breast implant promises to reduce breast tissue compromise and deformation and subsequent reoperation, further improving patient safety and satisfaction.

Familial juvenile hypertrophy of the breast.

OBJECTIVE: Juvenile (virginal) hypertrophy of the breast (JHB) is a relatively rare condition leading to gigantomastia in peripubertal females. The pathology is limited usually to the breast, with otherwise normal growth and development and without any other deformities. The rapid growth of the breast (bilateral or unilateral) in adolescent girls leads to significant physical and psychological difficulties. This gigantomastia is treated surgically by breast reduction or mastectomy and its modification. Familial JHB was described only once in the literature, and its etiology is unknown. RESULTS: We report here on a familial pattern of juvenile hypertrophy of the breast accompanied by congenital anonychia. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of such a presentation. Our study dealt with four members of the same family, related through their fathers, enduring congenital anonychia of hands and feet with no functional limitation and who showed rapid uncontrolled breast enlargement in prepubertal age. This was severe enough to cause the curtailment of their social activity and cessation of schooling. The mothers of all four patients had normal breasts and nails, whereas their fathers had anonychia. The genetic basis for the association between the two clinical findings is yet to be determined. CONCLUSION: The four girls underwent breast reduction surgery.

Vertical (two-layer) skin grafting: new reserves for autologic skin.

The main, permanent source of burn coverage continues to be autologic skin. In patients with major burns, the amount of available autologic skin may be insufficient. Consequently, severe wounds are covered after debridement with other biological or synthetic skin substitutes. Another source of skin reserves for wound coverage is the use of cultured keratinocyte sheet graft alone or with any dermal substitute. Some of these materials provide only temporal coverage and are often costly and time-consuming in preparation. These factors can be critical in burned patients. To expand the effective means of wound coverage, the authors sought a new source of autologic skin. The dermal grafts that were the marginal product of skin harvesting were meshed and grafted on the debrided third-degree burn, granulated wound, or muscle. The authors observed good dermal grafts "take" with rapid or slow epithelialization. They saw no the delay in donor site healing where the skin grafts overlapped. The histological difference in usual skin grafts and dermal grafts was studied after their harvesting and "taking."