ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Breast reconstruction is most commonly performed using implant-based reconstruction. Patients with subpectoral implant placement with or without latissimus dorsi (LD) muscle coverage can experience muscle pain and animation deformity. Due to minimal literature describing the use of botulinum toxin (BTX-A) treatment for these side effects from implant-based reconstruction, we report our outcomes. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of breast reconstructive patients for a single surgeon was performed. Patients who underwent BTX-A injection for muscular pain, spasm, or animation deformity were identified and outcomes reviewed. They were also stratified based on radiation treatment and type of muscle flap used. RESULTS: Eleven patients were identified who had a submuscular pectoralis pocket and/or a pedicled latissimus dorsi flap. Nineteen breasts were treated. The average amount of time from the patient's last surgery to BTX-A injection was 11.2 months. 25-100 units were used per injection with an average of 60 units. Non-irradiated patients had signifycantly lower post-injection capsular contracture Baker grades and significantly lower amounts of BTX-A were injected. Patients who had both pectoralis major muscle and LD implant-reconstruction were significantly less likely to have improvement in pain/tightness. Most patients reported improvement or resolution of their pain and/or animation deformities. CONCLUSION: Implant-based reconstruction using the pectoralis major and/or LD muscles can be plagued with muscular pain, spasm, and animation deformities. The use of BTX-A is a diagnostic and therapeutic modality for these post-breast reconstruction patients with most patients having resolution of symptoms without the need for additional surgery.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Breast reconstruction improves the psychological well-being of patients with breast cancer. Patients who complete nipple-areolar reconstruction are even more satisfied with their final reconstructive result. Nipple flattening is a common complication. We hypothesized that injectable soft-tissue filler can be used to augment nipple projection in patients who underwent breast reconstruction. METHODS: This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent breast reconstruction and desired an enhanced postoperative nipple projection. The patients underwent a single session of injection with a hyaluronic acid filler as an outpatient. The filler was injected intradermally at the base of the nipple until the desired nipple projection was obtained. RESULTS: Twelve patients and 22 breasts were included in this study. Enhanced nipple projection was observed in all cases, with an average increase of 3.0 mm in nipple height (range 2.5-4.5 mm). All injected nipples remained soft to the touch. All results were stable at a median of 7.5 months follow-up. No complications were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The use of injectable fillers for enhanced nipple projection is a useful adjunct treatment in patients undergoing breast reconstruction. Advantages include the ability to obtain nipple projection in patients who opt to forgo nipple-areola reconstruction with local flaps, to augment reconstructed nipples in patients with thin mastectomy skin flaps especially following implant-based reconstruction, and to improve projection of the native nipple following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Another benefit of this adjunct treatment is that the injection is reversible. Filler injection is a safe and simple solution to the problem of insufficient nipple projection.
