Risk Comparison Using Autologous Dermal Flap and Absorbable Breast Mesh on Patient Undergoing Subcutaneous Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

In patients with large breasts undergoing a subcutaneous mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction, is necessary to perform a mastopexy. The combination of these procedures increases the complication rate. To reduce it, it is necessary to cover the lower pole of the implant. Our study aimed to compare the use of an autologous dermal flap and an absorbable breast mesh. A total of 64 patients without previous breast surgery were divided into 2 groups, each with 32 patients. In the 1st group, the implant was covered with an autologous caudally based dermal flap, sutured to the great pectoral muscle. In the 2nd group, the implant was covered with a fully absorbable breast mesh, fixed caudally in the inframammary fold and cranially to the great pectoral muscle. The incidence of complications, the aesthetic effect, and patient satisfaction were evaluated in a one-year follow-up. In the 1st group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 partial nipple-areola complex necrosis, 4 cases of dehiscence in the T-suture, and the malposition of the implant in 2 patients. In the 2nd group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 cases of T-junction dehiscence, and 1 case of full nipple-areola complex necrosis, which resulted in implant loss. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the study groups. The dermal flap is more suitable for breasts with pronounced ptosis. The use of the synthetic mesh is suitable for smaller breasts, where the possible dermal flap would be too small to cover the implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Anaplastic Large-Cell Lymphoma Associated with Breast Implants: A Case Report of a Transgender Female.

Breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a rare peripheral T cell lymphoma. BIA-ALCL is a disease of the fibrous capsule surrounding the implant and occurs in patients after both breast reconstruction and augmentation. More than 300 cases have been reported so far, including two in a transgender patient. Here we describe BIA-ALCL presented with a mass in a transgender patient and the first case of BIA-ALCL in the Czech Republic. In 2007, a 33-year-old transgender male to female underwent bilateral breast augmentation as a part of his transformation to female. In June 2014, the patient developed a 5-cm tumorous mass in her left breast. Magnetic resonance imaging of the chest revealed a ruptured implant and a tumorous mass penetrating into the capsule and infiltrating the pectoral muscle. An R0 surgery was indicated-the implant, silicone gel and capsule were removed, and the tumorous mass was resected together with a part of the pectoral muscle. Histology revealed anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. The patient underwent standard staging procedures for lymphoma including a bone marrow trephine biopsy, which confirmed stage IE. The patient was treated with the standard chemotherapy for systemic ALCL-6 cycles of CHOP-21. The patient was tumor-free at the 2-year follow-up. BIA-ALCL has been reported mostly in women who received implants for either reconstructive or aesthetic augmentation. This is the third report of BIA-ALCL in a transgender person, the first in the Czech Republic. Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Centrifugation versus PureGraft for fatgrafting to the breast after breast-conserving therapy.

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving treatment (BCT) leads to a progressive and deteriorating breast deformity. Fatgrafting is ideal for breast reconstruction after BCT. The most frequently utilized technique for fat processing is centrifugation. The PureGraft device (Cytori Therapeutics, San Diego, CA, USA) is a new method that involves washing and filtering the fat to prepare the graft. We compared the subjective and objective outcomes of two fat-processing methods, centrifugation and PureGraft filtration. METHODS: Thirty patients underwent breast reconstruction performed by a single surgeon (OM) after BCT in our department between April 2011 and September 2012. The patients were preoperatively divided into two groups randomly: 15 received fatgrafts processed by centrifugation, and 15 received fatgrafts processed by washing in PureGraft bags. The patients were followed up for 12 to 30 months. To measure the subjective outcome, we distributed the BREAST-Q questionnaire to all the patients both preoperatively and 1 year postoperatively. The BCCT.core software evaluated the objective outcome of breast reconstruction by fatgrafting. RESULTS: The Breast-Q results indicated a tremendous improvement in the modules "Satisfaction with Breast" and "Psychosocial Well-being". The "Sexual Well-being" scale also improved. Only the module "Satisfaction with Breasts" significantly differed between groups; patients treated with the PureGraft fat exhibited better outcomes. The BCCT.core results did not significantly differ between the groups. CONCLUSION: One year postoperatively, the outcomes of the use of PureGraft bags or centrifugation to process fat for breast reconstruction after BCT did not differ. The unpredictability of the results following fatgrafting procedures is likely due to interindividual differences with yet-undisclosed causes.