ALEXANDRE MENDONCA MUNHOZ
Índice h a partir de 2011
15
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Instituto do Câncer do Estado de São Paulo, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina - Médico
LIM/04 - Laboratório de Microcirurgia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
LIM/04 - Laboratório de Microcirurgia, Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina
6 resultados
Resultados de Busca
Agora exibindo 1 - 6 de 6
- Optimizing Surgical Outcomes with Small-Volume Silicone Implants Associated with Autogenous Fat Grafting in Primary and Revision Breast Augmentation Surgery: Soft Weight Hybrid (SWEH) Concept(2022) MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca; MARQUES NETO, Ary de Azevedo; MAXIMILIANO, JoaoBackground Simultaneous association of autologous fat grafting (AFG) with silicone implants, defined as a hybrid procedure, has been proposed for breast augmentation (BA). In some patients, larger-volume implants may result in larger incisions, with long-term effects including implant palpability, soft tissue atrophy, and secondary ptosis. Some patients do not want large volume implants, or have insufficient soft tissue coverage. Recent improvements in AFG have led to new surgical options in BA for addressing these cases. Objectives This study combines AFG in BA using small-volume implants, known as the SWEH (soft weight hybrid) approach, and evaluates aesthetic advantages and outcomes following primary/secondary BA. Methods 25 patients (50 breasts) underwent SWEH procedures; this approach was indicated when the overlying tissue was insufficient to adequately cover the implant and patients refused large-volume implants. Three-dimensional images were obtained using a Divina 3D scanner system (AX3 Technologies, Miami, USA) to assess breast volume (BV) and intermammary distance (IMD) during follow-up. Results Mean patient age was 29.3 years (range: 21-42) and mean body mass index was 19.3 kg/m(2) (15.3-27.2). The most common implant (SmoothSilk surface Round/Ergonomix style) volume was 180 cc (175-215), and patients received a mean volume of 125 cc of fat (89-168)/breast in the subcutaneous tissue. Preoperative average BV measurements were 236.85 cc (170-335). At 3 and 12 months post-procedure, the average BV values were 488.82 and 478.73cc, respectively (p=0.475). The average preoperative IMD was 31.76 mm (range, 22-43); at 3 and 12 months post-procedure, the average IMD was 20.47 and 20.94 mm, respectively (p=0.61). Postoperative complications included subcutaneous banding in the axilla (n = 1; 4%) and hypertrophic scarring (n = 1; 4%). Breast imaging exams were performed; in 2 breasts (8%) localized oil cysts were observed; no cases of suspicious calcifications, fat necrosis, or lumps were seen. Fat retention rate (1 year) was calculated by the difference between the BV expected with 100% fat intake and the real BV observed. In our sample we observed an average of 72.7 (range: 69.2-77.3, SD: 2.63) and 76.7 (range: 72.3-79.9, SD: 2.18) percent of fat intake on the right and the left breast respectively. No rippling, implant malposition, or infection was observed during a mean follow-up of 22 months (6-40). Conclusions SWEH is a useful surgical alternative that combines the benefits of AFG and implant-based augmentation, particularly with regard to soft tissue coverage, and avoids the limitations of larger-volume implants. The association of small-volume gel implants and smaller scars can yield satisfactory aesthetic outcomes.
- Zones for Fat Grafting in Hybrid Breast Augmentation: Standardization for Planning of Fat Grafting Based on Breast Cleavage Units(2022) MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca; MAXIMILIANO, Joao; MARQUES NETO, Ary de Azevedo; DUARTE, Daniele Walter; OLIVEIRA, Antonio Carlos Pinto de; PORTINHO, Ciro Paz; ZANIN, Eduardo; COLLARES, Marcos Vinicius MartinsBackground: Autologous fat grafting is a procedure indicated for breast augmentation to improve coverage of silicone implants and redesign breast shape. Different techniques are based on parameters that have not been systematically standardized. The authors present a method using breast zone standardization based on breast anatomy to achieve an anatomical composite breast. Methods: The authors performed this zone standardization in 76 breasts (38 patients) undergoing primary/secondary augmentation. The area between the implant and the clavicle and parasternal area was marked to receive fat grafting and divided into three zones. A mathematical formula [volume of autologous fat graft = (pi x r(2) x p)/4.8] was used to estimate the fat graft volume according to implant volume in the respective zones. Results: Implant volumes ranged from 205 to 375 cc (mean, 265 cc), and patients received an average fat graft volume of 105.3 cc per breast (range, 36 to 135 cc); the average fat volume in zones I/II and III was 78.28 cc (range, 0 to 100 cc) and 27.03 cc (range, 15 to 60 cc), respectively. Three minor complications were observed (5.2 percent) during a mean follow-up of 12.8 months. A high correlation was observed between the fat grafting performed in the cohort and predictions obtained from the formula (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Recognizing risky cleavage breast zones between the implant pocket and the upper and medial quadrants remains essential to attain satisfactory outcomes. Although experience and proper judgment are still important in the fat grafting technique, the data presented here offer plastic surgeons an additional standardized framework to help deliver predictable hybrid breast augmentation.
- Reoperative Augmentation Mammoplasty: An Algorithm to Optimize Soft-Tissue Support, Pocket Control, and Smooth Implant Stability with Composite Reverse Inferior Muscle Sling (CRIMS) and its Technical Variations(2022) MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca; MARQUES NETO, Ary de Azevedo; MAXIMILIANO, JoaoBackground Reoperative augmentation mammoplasty (RAM) is a challenging procedure, with the highest rates of complications and revision. Complications include implant malposition, lateral displacement, bottoming out, and rotation. These deformities can be addressed with various procedures, but the pocket control and stability of the new smooth implant surface may present limitations. Objectives This study revisits a previously described predictable approach in primary breast augmentation and defines a surgical treatment algorithm for RAM technique selection. Methods Between 2017 and 2021, 72 patients (144 breasts) underwent RAM with composite reverse inferior muscle sling (CRIMS) technique and its technical variations (types I-IV). CRIMS technique involves placing a silicone gel implant into the submuscular (SM) pocket with an inferior sling of the pectoralis major muscle based on the dimensions of the implant, in combination with support points/dermal bridge sutures to stabilize the implant and glandular tissue at the lower breast pole (LBP). Reasons for surgery were ptosis (92%), implant and malposition (59.6%). Patients were followed for at least 6 months in 5 cases (6.9%), at least 12 months in 50 cases (69.4%), for at least 36 months in 10 cases (13.8%), and more than 36 months in 7 cases (9.7%) (mean 34 months; range 6-48 months). Patients were evaluated in terms of resolution of symptoms, satisfaction, and complications. Three-dimensional imaging (3DI) obtained from the Divina scanner system was used and followed up for 1 year to evaluate breast position, lower pole stretch (LPS), and intermammary distance (IMD). Results Eleven cases of minor complications were observed in 9 patients (12.5%): hypertrophic scarring in 4 (5.5%), wound dehiscence in 4 (5.5%), Baker II/III capsular contracture in 1 (1.3%). SmoothSilk surface silicone implants were used in all cases, with an average volume decrease of 120 cc. Sixty-eight patients (94.4%) were either very satisfied/satisfied with their aesthetic result. Breast images were performed in a group of 65 patients (90.2%), and in 7 breasts (10.7%), localized oil cysts were observed. The value for LPS was 7.87% (p <0.0001) between 10 days and 1 year, with the majority occurring early in the first 3 months, indicating that the LBP/implant remains steady during the last months of follow-up. No cases of fat necrosis/seroma were observed. There were no signs of intra/extracapsular ruptures, capsular contracture. There were 2 cases (3%) of minimal implant displacement and no cases of rotation. Conclusions CRIMS and its variations can be performed successfully in RAM. An algorithmic approach can facilitate the pre- and intraoperative decision-making process and provide the new pocket control and implant stability with acceptable complication rates. Further accurate evaluation is recommended to understand the benefits or disadvantages of CRIMS compared to other RAM techniques.
- The oncological safety of autologous fat grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis(2022) GONCALVES, Rodrigo; MOTA, Bruna Salani; SOBREIRA-LIMA, Bruno; RICCI, Marcos Desiderio; JR, Jose Maria Soares; MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca; BARACAT, Edmund Chada; FILASSI, Jose RobertoObjective To present a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis evaluating the oncological safety of autologous fat grafting (AFG). Summary background data: AFG for breast reconstruction presents difficulties during follow-up radiological exams, and the oncological potential of grafted fat is uncertain. Previous studies confirmed that the fatty tissue could be transferred under a good condition suitable would not interfere with mammographic follow-up, although the issue of oncological safety remains. Methods We reviewed the literature published until 01/18/2021. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR). We included studies that evaluated women with breast cancer who undergone surgery followed by reconstruction with AFG. We synthesized data using the inverse variance method on the log-HR (log of the hazard ratio) scale for time-to-event outcomes using RevMan. We assessed heterogeneity using the Chi(2) and I-2 statistics. Results Fifteen studies evaluating 8541 participants were included. The hazard ratios (HR) could be extracted from four studies, and there was no difference in OS between the AFG group and control (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.54, p = 0.71, I-2 = 58%, moderate certainty evidence), and publication bias was not detected. The HR for DFS could be extracted from six studies, and there was no difference between the AFG group and control (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.38, p = 0.96, I-2 = 0%, moderate certainty evidence). The HR for LR could be extracted from ten studies, and there was no difference between the AFG group and control (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.12, p = 0.43, I-2 = 1%, moderate certainty evidence). Conclusion According to the current evidence, AFG is a safe technique of breast reconstruction for patients that have undergone BC surgery and did not affect OS, DFS, or LR.
- Analysis of Artifacts on MRI from Electronic Identification Enablement in Silicone Gel Implants(2022) MUNHOZ, Alexandre Mendonca