Textured versus Smooth Tissue Expanders: A Comparison of Complications in 3526 Breast Reconstructions

被引:6
|
作者
Nelson, Jonas A. [1 ,3 ]
Rubenstein, Robyn N. [1 ]
Vorstenbosch, Joshua [2 ]
Haglich, Kathryn [1 ]
Poulton, Richard T. [1 ]
Mcgriff, De'von [1 ]
Stern, Carrie S. [1 ]
Coriddi, Michelle [1 ]
Cordeiro, Peter G. [1 ]
Mccarthy, Colleen M. [1 ]
Disa, Joseph J. [1 ]
Mehrara, Babak J. [1 ]
Matros, Evan [1 ]
机构
[1] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Plast & Reconstruct Surg Serv, New York, NY USA
[2] McGill Univ, Royal Victoria Hosp, Dept Surg, Plast & Reconstruct Surg Serv, Montreal, PQ, Canada
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Dept Surg, Plast & Reconstruct Surg Serv, 321 East 61st,6th Floor, New York, NY 10065 USA
关键词
IMPLANTS; EXPERIENCE; SURFACE;
D O I
10.1097/PRS.0000000000010600
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background: Increased understanding of breast implantassociated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma has led to a shift away from textured breast devices. A few small studies have compared the complication rates of textured and smooth tissue expanders (TEs). The aim of this study was to compare complication profiles in patients undergoing two-stage postmastectomy breast reconstruction with either textured or smooth TEs. Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review of female patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with textured or smooth TEs from 2018 to 2020 at their institution. Rates of seroma, infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, exposure, and TE loss were analyzed in the overall cohort and subgroups undergoing prepectoral and subpectoral TE placement. A propensity scorematched analysis was used to decrease the effects of confounders comparing textured and smooth TEs. Results: The authors analyzed 3526 TEs (1456 textured and 2070 smooth). More frequent use of acellular dermal matrix, SPY angiography, and prepectoral TE placement was noted in the smooth TE cohort (P < 0.001). Univariate analysis suggested higher rates of infection/cellulitis, malposition/rotation, and exposure in smooth TEs (all P < 0.01). Rates of TE loss did not differ. After propensity matching, no differences were noted in infection or TE loss. Prepectoral smooth expanders had increased rates of malposition/rotation. Conclusions: TE surface type did not affect rates of TE loss, although increased rates of expander malposition were noted in the smooth prepectoral cohort. Further research is needed to examine breast implantassociated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma risk with temporary textured TE exposure to improve decision-making. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCW: Therapeutic, III. Copyright (C) 2023 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons
引用
收藏
页码:262e / 272e
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Major Complications After Textured Versus Non-textured Breast Implants in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Score Analysis
    Bellaire, Christopher P.
    Sayegh, Farah
    Janssen, Pierce
    Rutland, John W.
    Salzberg, C. Andrew
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2021, 45 (05) : 2077 - 2085
  • [32] Smooth vs Textured Expanders: Patient Factors and Anatomic Plane Are Greater Factors in Determining First-Stage Breast Reconstruction Outcomes
    Dahmus, Emma S.
    Ruffino, Amanda E.
    Madera, Joshua D.
    Long, Alexandra
    Wang, Shengxuan
    Kauffman, Christian A.
    Devitt, Sean
    Sanders, Christopher
    Desantis, Joseph
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2024, 44 (02) : NP159 - NP167
  • [33] Complications Including Capsular Contracture in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction With Textured Anatomical Versus Smooth Round Implants: A Single Center Retrospective Analysis
    Jeon, Hong Bae
    Lee, Minyoung
    Roh, Tai Suk
    Jeong, Joon
    Ahn, Sung Gwe
    Bae, Soong June
    Lee, Nara
    Kim, Young Seok
    JOURNAL OF BREAST CANCER, 2023, 26 (01) : 25 - 34
  • [34] A comparison of 500 prefilled textured saline breast implants versus 500 standard textured saline breast implants: Is there a difference in deflation rates?
    Stevens, WG
    Hirsch, EM
    Stoker, DA
    Cohen, R
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2006, 117 (07) : 2175 - 2178
  • [35] Evaluation of Dual-port versus Single-port Tissue Expanders in Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction
    Parmeshwar, Nisha
    Piper, Merisa
    Viner, Jennifer
    Foster, Robert
    Kim, Esther A.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2021, 9 (07) : E3703
  • [36] Breast Cancer Recurrence after Smooth versus Textured Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Matched Cohort Study
    Wu, Zhen-Yu
    Han, Hyun Ho
    Han, Jing
    Son, Byung-Ho
    Eom, Jin Sup
    Kim, Sung-Bae
    Gong, Gyungyub
    Kim, Hak Hee
    Ahn, Sei-Hyun
    Ko, BeomSeok
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2022, 150 : 30S - 37S
  • [37] T-CELL ANALYSIS OF THE SURROUNDING CAPSULE OF A TEXTURED AND A SMOOTH TISSUE EXPANDER USED FOR BREAST RECONSTRUCTION
    Shiokawa, I.
    Satoh, T.
    Ogawa, Y.
    Shimazaki, Y.
    Ishiokawa, A.
    Nagasaka, Y.
    Kawamura, R.
    Momosawa, A.
    WOUND REPAIR AND REGENERATION, 2022, 30 (04) : A13 - A13
  • [38] RATE AND INCIDENCE OF CAPSULAR CONTRACTURE - A COMPARISON OF SMOOTH AND TEXTURED SILICONE DOUBLE-LUMEN BREAST PROSTHESES
    ERSEK, RA
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 1991, 87 (05) : 879 - 884
  • [39] Radiotherapy and breast reconstruction: Complications and cosmesis with tram versus tissue expander/implant
    Chawla, AK
    Kachnic, LA
    Taghian, AG
    Niemierko, A
    Zapton, DT
    Powell, SN
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2002, 54 (02): : 520 - 526
  • [40] Complications in primary versus secondary deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap breast reconstructions: A multicentre study
    Beugels, J.
    Hoekstra, L.
    Tuinder, S.
    Smit, L.
    Keymeulen, K.
    Van der Hulst, R.
    de Grzymala, A. Piatkowski
    Heuts, E.
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CANCER, 2016, 57 : S65 - S65