1.Capsular Contracture after Breast Augmentation: An Update for Clinical Practice.
Hannah HEADON ; Adbul KASEM ; Kefah MOKBEL
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2015;42(5):532-543
Capsular contracture is the most common complication following implant based breast surgery and is one of the most common reasons for reoperation. Therefore, it is important to try and understand why this happens, and what can be done to reduce its incidence. A literature search using the MEDLINE database was conducted including search terms 'capsular contracture breast augmentation', 'capsular contracture pathogenesis', 'capsular contracture incidence', and 'capsular contracture management', which yielded 82 results which met inclusion criteria. Capsular contracture is caused by an excessive fibrotic reaction to a foreign body (the implant) and has an overall incidence of 10.6%. Risk factors that were identified included the use of smooth (vs. textured) implants, a subglandular (vs. submuscular) placement, use of a silicone (vs. saline) filled implant and previous radiotherapy to the breast. The standard management of capsular contracture is surgical via a capsulectomy or capsulotomy. Medical treatment using the off-label leukotriene receptor antagonist Zafirlukast has been reported to reduce severity and help prevent capsular contracture from forming, as has the use of acellular dermal matrices, botox and neopocket formation. However, nearly all therapeutic approaches are associated with a significant rate of recurrence. Capsular contracture is a multifactorial fibrotic process the precise cause of which is still unknown. The incidence of contracture developing is lower with the use of textured implants, submuscular placement and the use of polyurethane coated implants. Symptomatic capsular contracture is usually managed surgically, however recent research has focussed on preventing capsular contracture from occurring, or treating it with autologous fat transfer.
Acellular Dermis
;
Breast Implants
;
Breast*
;
Contracture*
;
Female
;
Foreign Bodies
;
Incidence
;
Mammaplasty
;
Polyurethanes
;
Radiotherapy
;
Receptors, Leukotriene
;
Recurrence
;
Reoperation
;
Risk Factors
;
Silicones
2.Breast Lipofilling: A Review of Current Practice.
Abdul KASEM ; Umar WAZIR ; Hannah HEADON ; Kefah MOKBEL
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2015;42(2):126-130
Lipofilling is a reconstructive and aesthetic technique that has recently grown in popularity and is increasingly being used in breast surgery. Previous concerns had been raised regarding its safety when used for remodelling and reconstruction of the breast; however, these concerns have since been dismissed. Over the subsequent two decades, little evidence has been found to support these early theoretical concerns, and growing numbers of proponents of the procedure are confident in its safety. Many developments and refinements in the technique have taken place in recent years, and several studies have been published regarding the safety of lipofilling in the breast. We reviewed the current literature regarding the use of different lipofilling techniques as well as the current evidence regarding the oncological safety of the procedure in patients seeking aesthetic breast enhancement and in patients requiring reconstruction after treatment for breast cancer.
Breast Neoplasms
;
Breast*
;
Female
;
Humans
;
Lipectomy
;
Mammaplasty
;
Transplantation
3.The Oncological Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Systematic Review of the Literature with a Pooled Analysis of 12,358 Procedures.
Hannah Louise HEADON ; Abdul KASEM ; Kefah MOKBEL
Archives of Plastic Surgery 2016;43(4):328-338
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly popular as a procedure for the treatment of breast cancer and as a prophylactic procedure for those at high risk of developing the disease. However, it remains a controversial option due to questions regarding its oncological safety and concerns regarding locoregional recurrence. This systematic review with a pooled analysis examines the current literature regarding NSM, including locoregional recurrence and complication rates. Systematic electronic searches were conducted using the PubMed database and the Ovid database for studies reporting the indications for NSM and the subsequent outcomes. Studies between January 1970 and January 2015 (inclusive) were analysed if they met the inclusion criteria. Pooled descriptive statistics were performed. Seventy-three studies that met the inclusion criteria were included in the analysis, yielding 12,358 procedures. After a mean follow up of 38 months (range, 7.4-156 months), the overall pooled locoregional recurrence rate was 2.38%, the overall complication rate was 22.3%, and the overall incidence of nipple necrosis, either partial or total, was 5.9%. Significant heterogeneity was found among the published studies and patient selection was affected by tumour characteristics. We concluded that NSM appears to be an oncologically safe option for appropriately selected patients, with low rates of locoregional recurrence. For NSM to be performed, tumours should be peripherally located, smaller than 5 cm in diameter, located more than 2 cm away from the nipple margin, and human epidermal growth factor 2-negative. A separate histopathological examination of the subareolar tissue and exclusion of malignancy at this site is essential for safe oncological practice. Long-term follow-up studies and prospective cohort studies are required in order to determine the best reconstructive methods.
Breast Neoplasms
;
Cohort Studies
;
Epidermal Growth Factor
;
Follow-Up Studies
;
Humans
;
Incidence
;
Mastectomy*
;
Necrosis
;
Nipples
;
Patient Selection
;
Population Characteristics
;
Prospective Studies
;
Recurrence