TY - JOUR
T1 - Long-term impact of lipofilling in hybrid breast reconstruction
T2 - retrospective analysis of two cohorts
AU - Calabrese, Sarah
AU - Zingaretti, Nicola
AU - De Francesco, Francesco
AU - Riccio, Michele
AU - De Biasio, Fabrizio
AU - Massarut, Samuele
AU - Almesberger, Daria
AU - Parodi, Pier Camillo
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019, The Author(s).
Copyright:
Copyright 2020 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2020/6/1
Y1 - 2020/6/1
N2 - Lipofilling has recently gained popularity as a tool in primary treatment of breast cancer, and its association with two-stage implant breast reconstruction is considered as standard treatment in many centers. However, no data are available about the long-term results of the association of lipofilling in combination with expander-implant reconstruction. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients treated between January 2010 and December 2014. Two groups were compared. Group 1 had a standard expander-implant two-stage reconstruction. Group 2 underwent hybrid breast reconstruction (HBR). Patient characteristics, hospitalization, outcomes, reoperation details, outpatient visits, and evaluation questionnaires were taken into consideration. Intergroup comparison was performed using Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U test and Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. Two hundred fourteen patients were evaluated: 130 patients in group 1 and 84 patients in group 2. Group 2 showed significant benefits over group 1 in terms of capsular contracture rate, breast pain, and displacement/rotation of the implant (p = 0.005). The HBR protocol is associated with lower rate of capsular contracture, less breast pain at long follow-up times, and lower overall rates of revision surgery compared to standard expander-implant reconstruction. A specific cost analysis will help further clarify the advantages of this protocol over a standard procedure. Level of Evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic, therapeutic study.
AB - Lipofilling has recently gained popularity as a tool in primary treatment of breast cancer, and its association with two-stage implant breast reconstruction is considered as standard treatment in many centers. However, no data are available about the long-term results of the association of lipofilling in combination with expander-implant reconstruction. A retrospective analysis was conducted on patients treated between January 2010 and December 2014. Two groups were compared. Group 1 had a standard expander-implant two-stage reconstruction. Group 2 underwent hybrid breast reconstruction (HBR). Patient characteristics, hospitalization, outcomes, reoperation details, outpatient visits, and evaluation questionnaires were taken into consideration. Intergroup comparison was performed using Wilcoxon Mann-Whitney U test and Pearson’s chi-square test or Fisher’s exact test for categorical variables. Two hundred fourteen patients were evaluated: 130 patients in group 1 and 84 patients in group 2. Group 2 showed significant benefits over group 1 in terms of capsular contracture rate, breast pain, and displacement/rotation of the implant (p = 0.005). The HBR protocol is associated with lower rate of capsular contracture, less breast pain at long follow-up times, and lower overall rates of revision surgery compared to standard expander-implant reconstruction. A specific cost analysis will help further clarify the advantages of this protocol over a standard procedure. Level of Evidence: Level III, risk/prognostic, therapeutic study.
KW - Autologous fat graft
KW - Breast surgery
KW - Capsular contracture
KW - Hybrid breast reconstruction
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85075941257&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85075941257&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00238-019-01577-z
DO - 10.1007/s00238-019-01577-z
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85075941257
VL - 43
SP - 257
EP - 268
JO - European Journal of Plastic Surgery
JF - European Journal of Plastic Surgery
SN - 0930-343X
IS - 3
ER -