TY - JOUR
T1 - A Critical Analysis of Prosthetic Augmentation of Autologous Microvascular Breast Reconstruction
AU - Piper, Merisa L.
AU - Lentz, Rachel
AU - Gomez-Sanchez, Clara
AU - Withers, Jacquelyn
AU - Hu, Allison
AU - Sbitany, Hani
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - Introduction The combined approach using both an implant and autologous tissue for breast reconstruction has become more common over the last 10 years. We sought to provide a systematic review and outcomes analysis of this technique. Methods We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library database to identify studies that described implant augmentation of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction. The references of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any additional pertinent articles. Results We identified 11 articles, which included 230 patients and 378 flaps. Implants used ranged in size from 90 to 510 cc, with an average size of 198 cc. Implants were more frequently placed at the time of autologous reconstruction and in the subpectoral plane. There were no total flap losses, and partial flap loss occurred in 3 patients (1%). There were no cases of venous or arterial thrombosis and no early return to the operating room for flap compromise. Eight implants (2%) were lost because of infection or extrusion, and capsular contracture occurred in 9 breasts (3%). When stratified by the timing of implant placement (immediate vs delayed), there were no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes except the immediate group had a higher infection rate. Conclusions The criteria for women to be candidates for autologous tissue breast reconstruction can be expanded by adding an implant underneath the flap. We found the overall flap loss rate is comparable with standard autologous flap reconstruction, and the implant loss rate is lower than that in patients who undergo prosthetic reconstruction alone.
AB - Introduction The combined approach using both an implant and autologous tissue for breast reconstruction has become more common over the last 10 years. We sought to provide a systematic review and outcomes analysis of this technique. Methods We searched PubMed and the Cochrane Library database to identify studies that described implant augmentation of autologous flaps for breast reconstruction. The references of selected articles were also reviewed to identify any additional pertinent articles. Results We identified 11 articles, which included 230 patients and 378 flaps. Implants used ranged in size from 90 to 510 cc, with an average size of 198 cc. Implants were more frequently placed at the time of autologous reconstruction and in the subpectoral plane. There were no total flap losses, and partial flap loss occurred in 3 patients (1%). There were no cases of venous or arterial thrombosis and no early return to the operating room for flap compromise. Eight implants (2%) were lost because of infection or extrusion, and capsular contracture occurred in 9 breasts (3%). When stratified by the timing of implant placement (immediate vs delayed), there were no significant differences in any postoperative outcomes except the immediate group had a higher infection rate. Conclusions The criteria for women to be candidates for autologous tissue breast reconstruction can be expanded by adding an implant underneath the flap. We found the overall flap loss rate is comparable with standard autologous flap reconstruction, and the implant loss rate is lower than that in patients who undergo prosthetic reconstruction alone.
KW - autologous tissue
KW - breast implant
KW - breast reconstruction
KW - free flap augmentation
KW - hybrid breast reconstruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85085232265&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002085
DO - 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002085
M3 - Review article
C2 - 31663940
AN - SCOPUS:85085232265
SN - 0148-7043
VL - 84
SP - 717
EP - 721
JO - Annals of Plastic Surgery
JF - Annals of Plastic Surgery
IS - 6
ER -