Single Staged Mastopexy With Autologous Fat Grafting: An Alternative to Augmentation Mastopexy With Implants.

BACKGROUND: Improving the ptotic breast with mastopexy and restoring upper pole fullness with augmentation continues to be a challenging issue for plastic surgeons. Autologous fat grating (AFG) for shaping and contouring of implant augmented breasts has shown positive outcomes with few complications. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate our experience with combined mastopexy and fat grafting for women with existing breast ptosis who prefer not to receive prosthetic breast implants but do desire volume enhancement. METHODS: A retrospective review of patients undergoing a single staged mastopexy with AFG, from 2006 to 2017, was performed. Inclusion criteria were women with breast ptosis or tuberous breasts desiring improved breast shape and volume. Patients were excluded if they were undergoing implant removal before the procedure. Clinical aesthetic outcomes were assessed by fellow plastic surgeons according to the Telemark Breast Scoring system. RESULTS: A total of 284 breasts, in 140 women, underwent a single staged mastopexy with AFG. The mean amount of fat grafted per breast was 299.4 mL (range, 50-710 mL). There were no surgical site infections, hematomas, or seromas. There were 3 major and 8 minor (0.06%) postoperative breast complications. A total of 13 plastic surgeons, of the 183 invited (7.1%), completed the breast outcomes survey. Regarding each category, there was significant improvement (P ≤ 0.0001) in upper pole fullness, ptosis, overall aesthetics, and symmetry postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: AFG combined with mastopexy is not associated with significant postoperative complications and results in excellent breast aesthetic outcomes.

Neoumbilicoplasty with a Superiorly Based Abdominal Skin Flap.

We propose a neoumbilicoplasty technique that can be applied when the umbilical stalk becomes disrupted during an abdominoplasty. This case used surgical concepts that involved progressive thinning of the flap in a 3-cm radius around the neoumbilicus, with increased thinning toward the neoumbilical position. This was followed with suture tacking of the thinned abdominal flap to create a concavity around the neoumbilicus. A longer "U" shaped incision was created and also sutured down to abdominal wall to recreate an umbilical "floor" with the adjacent skin sutured to the superior-based flap to construct the walls of the neoumbilicus. An aesthetically pleasing umbilicus resulted with high patient satisfaction and a lack of postoperative complications. There were no additional scars extending beyond the umbilical region.

Periumbilical Perforator-Sparing Abdominoplasty in Patients With Abdominal Scars.

Abdominoplasty is one of the most common cosmetic surgical procedures. Patients who undergo abdominoplasties with abdominal scars are at an increased risk for skin necrosis and wound breakdown. To prevent further disruption of vascularity, the dissection and mobilization is often limited resulting in a suboptimal esthetic result. The periumbilical perforator-sparing technique allows for vascular preservation and adequate mobilization to produce excellent esthetic results in patients with abdominal scars.

Deep Inferior Epigastric Artery Perforator Flap Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Previous Bariatric Surgery: Is It Safe and Feasible?

BACKGROUND: Obesity is widely recognized as a major health concern and a leading cause of preventable death. The correlation between obesity and breast cancer has been thoroughly described by several authors. Bariatric surgery is often associated with redundant abdominal tissue, often leading patients to consider body-contouring procedures. Autologous tissue breast reconstruction using the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap has advantages because it is tissue that is normally discarded during postbariatric body contouring. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 18 DIEP flaps performed by the senior author in 9 patients for breast reconstruction between February 2008 and May 2013. All patients underwent mastectomies. All patients underwent bariatric surgery preceding breast reconstruction. Breast reconstruction was performed immediately in 13 cases and delayed in 5 cases. RESULTS: Mean age of the study population was 44.6 years (range, 41-57 years). The mean maximum body mass index of the patients was 44 (range, 37.6-52.1), and the mean current body mass index at the time of the reconstruction was 30.7 (range, 24.3-38.1). No intraoperative complications were reported. No fascia or muscle was taken during flap dissection. Mean operative time was 632 minutes (range, from 480 to 750 minutes). Average hospital stay was 4 days. No partial or total flap loss was reported. There were no postoperative hernias or bulges at the abdominal donor site. CONCLUSIONS: This series represents the largest group of patients undergoing DIEP flap breast reconstruction after bariatric surgery. In the hands of experienced microsurgeons, breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap in postbariatric patients represents a low-risk option with high satisfaction.

Delayed Mammoplasty with Silicone Gel Implants following DIEP Flap Breast Reconstruction.

UNLABELLED: The deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap is a state-of-the-art option for breast reconstruction. However, thin patients with medium- to large-size native breasts are not ideal candidates due to the limited amount of available tissue. We reviewed our experience utilizing the DIEP flap in combination with prosthetic implants. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 7 patients, totaling 11 implants, who underwent breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap and subsequent mammoplasty. All cases underwent previous mastectomies. No implant placement was offered at the time of their DIEP flap reconstruction. Immediate breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap was performed in 9 cases, whereas 2 required delayed reconstruction secondary to postmastectomy radiotherapy. No patients received postreconstruction radiotherapy. Breast asymmetry and inadequate volume were the primary indications for mammoplasty. For all cases, we used smooth, round silicone gel implants, which were placed in the subpectoral region. RESULTS: Mean age was 43 years. One patient was actively smoking. Four patients underwent bilateral implant placement. The mean time of delay between breast reconstruction and mammoplasty was 61 weeks. Average volume of silicone implants was 229 mL. A medial pedicle vertical mastopexy was performed in 1 patient on a nonreconstructed breast to achieve symmetry. Five patients underwent nipple reconstruction. All patients underwent delayed mammoplasty without intraoperative complications and good aesthetic results. CONCLUSIONS: Delayed mammoplasty following DIEP flap breast reconstruction is a safe and feasible procedure for patients who seek an aesthetic and natural-looking breast but lack adequate abdominal tissue.