Outcome analysis and assessment of the lower pole expansion following breast augmentation with ergonomic implants: Optimizing results with patient selection based on 5-year data

Nenhuma Miniatura disponível
Citações na Scopus
1
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2024
DOI
Scopus
Web of Science
PubMed
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER SCI LTD
Autores
NETO, Ary de Azevedo Marques
MAXIMILIANO, Joao
FRAGA, Murillo
Citação
JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, v.88, p.73-82, 2024
Projetos de Pesquisa
Unidades Organizacionais
Fascículo
Resumo
Background: Silicone implants have gone through adaptations to improve esthetic outcomes. With the progress of technology, including gel rheology, different properties have been introduced. Ergonomic style implants (ESI) feature enhanced rheological properties and provide a shaped contour with a round base.Objectives: This study investigated outcomes for ESI in breast augmentation concerning lower pole stretching (LPS) and implant stability and describes an algorithm to assist in decision- making.Methods: A total of 148 patients (296 breasts) underwent breast augmentation with ESI; this procedure was indicated in patients with good skin quality and < 6 cm between the nip- ple-areola complex and the inframammary fold.Results: The mean patient age was 29.6 years (range: 19-39), and 93 patients (62.8%) under- went primary breast augmentation with demi/full projection (average volume of 245 cc [175-375 cc]). Axillary incision and subfascial pocket were indicated in 115 (77.7%) and 72 (48%) cases, respectively. Average LPS values were 32.2% (24.91 mm) and 10.86% (9.42 mm) at up to 10 days and 10 days to 12 months postprocedure, respectively. Patients were followed for a mean of 29.9 +/- 26.4 months (range: 6-66). Complication rates per breast and per patient were 5% and 10%, respectively, and included subcutaneous banding in the axilla (1.6%), implant displacement (1.2%), and wound dehiscence (0.8%). No cases of infection, seroma, or rippling complications were observed.Conclusions: The present decision-making algorithm summarizes the process involved in breast augmentation using ESI and is intended to help standardize decisions. With correct planning, long-lasting outcomes can be achieved due to favorable interactions between ESI and the patient's tissues.(c) 2023 British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.
Palavras-chave
Breast implants, Round implants, Anatomical implants, Ergonomic implants, Outcome, Complications
URI
https://observatorio.fm.usp.br/handle/OPI/58127
Referências
  1. Adams WP, 2017, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V139, P67, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002922
  2. Adams WP, 2016, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V138, P987, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002623
  3. Adams WP, 2012, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V130, p598E, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318262f607
  4. Benito-Ruiz J, 2009, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V123, p31E, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31819055b5
  5. Calobrace MB, 2021, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V148, P771, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008395
  6. Calobrace MB, 2014, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V134, p6S, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000347
  7. Chang EI, 2018, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V142, p31S, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005000
  8. clinicaltrials gov, Study of the safety and effectiveness of the motiva implants silicone gel-filled breast implants smoothsilk/silksurface in subjects who are undergoing primary breast augmentation, primary breast reconstruction, and revision surgery
  9. Doloff JC, 2021, NAT BIOMED ENG, V5, P1115, DOI 10.1038/s41551-021-00739-4
  10. Duncan AM, 2022, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V149, P28, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008671
  11. Tijerina VNE, 2010, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V34, P16, DOI 10.1007/s00266-009-9402-4
  12. Graf RM, 2000, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V24, P216, DOI 10.1007/s002660010036
  13. Hammond DC, 2014, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V134, p16S, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000617
  14. Hedén P, 2015, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V3, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000510
  15. Huemer GM, 2018, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V141, p831E, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004367
  16. Jones P, 2018, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V142, P837, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004801
  17. Kahn R L, 1989, Int J Prosthodont, V2, P342
  18. Lin J, 2006, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V118, P1557, DOI 10.1097/01.prs.0000237002.89761.98
  19. Lista F, 2013, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V132, P1684, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a80880
  20. Lista F, 2013, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V132, P295, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182958a6d
  21. Mallucci P, 2016, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V137, P1728, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002230
  22. Matousek SA, 2014, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V133, P273, DOI 10.1097/01.prs.0000436798.20047.dc
  23. Maximiliano J, 2020, AESTHET SURG J, V40, pNP438, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaa017
  24. Maxwell GP, 2015, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V3, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000388
  25. Maxwell GP, 2012, AESTHET SURG J, V32, P709, DOI 10.1177/1090820X12452423
  26. Montemurro P, 2021, AESTHET SURG J, V41, P189, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaa169
  27. Montemurro P, 2016, AESTHET SURG J, V36, P966, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjw011
  28. Munhoz AM, 2006, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V30, P503, DOI 10.1007/s00266-006-0017-8
  29. Munhoz AM, 2022, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V150, P782, DOI 10.1097/PRS.0000000000009605
  30. Munhoz AM, 2022, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V46, P1116, DOI 10.1007/s00266-021-02726-1
  31. Munhoz AM, 2022, AESTHET PLAST SURG, V46, P1087, DOI 10.1007/s00266-021-02653-1
  32. Munhoz AM, 2021, AESTHET SURG J, V41, pNP364, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjab029
  33. Munhoz AM, 2020, AESTHET SURG J, V40, P1179, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjz339
  34. Munhoz AM, 2019, PRS-GLOB OPEN, V7, DOI 10.1097/GOX.0000000000002466
  35. Munhoz AM, 2020, AESTHET SURG J, V40, pNP356, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjz334
  36. Munhoz AM, 2017, CASE REP PLAST SURG, V4, P99, DOI 10.1080/23320885.2017.1407658
  37. Munhoz AM, 2015, CLIN PLAST SURG, V42, P565, DOI 10.1016/j.cps.2015.06.016
  38. Rodrigues Filho Leonardo Eloy, 2003, Pesqui Odontol Bras, V17, P254
  39. Goes JCS, 2015, CLIN PLAST SURG, V42, P551, DOI 10.1016/j.cps.2015.06.017
  40. Science of breast tissue management, 2019, Patient centric ergonomics and rheology of breast implants. Motiva Implant matrix silicone breast implants product summary
  41. Serra-Renom JM, 2005, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V116, P640, DOI 10.1097/01.prs.0000173558.52280.6e
  42. Sforza M, 2021, AESTHET SURG J, V41, pNP1143, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjaa297
  43. Sforza M, 2019, AESTHET SURG J, V39, pS95, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjz054
  44. Sforza M, 2018, AESTHET SURG J, V38, pS62, DOI 10.1093/asj/sjx150
  45. Tebbetts JB, 2002, PLAST RECONSTR SURG, V109, P1396, DOI 10.1097/00006534-200204010-00030

Coleções
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - HC/ICESP
Artigos e Materiais de Revistas Científicas - LIM/04