Pre-pectoral Breast Reconstruction: Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Two-Stages vs Single-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundTwo-stages pre-pectoral breast reconstruction may confer advantages over direct to implant (DTI) and subpectoral reconstruction in selected patients who have no indication for autologous reconstruction. The primary endpoint of the study was to evaluate and compare the incidence of capsular contracture in the pre-pectoral two-stages technique versus the direct to implant technique. Complications related to the two surgical techniques and patient satisfaction were also evaluated.MethodsA retrospective review of 45 two stages and 45 Direct-to-implant, DTI patients was completed. Acellular dermal matrix was used in all patients. An evaluation of anthropometric and clinical parameters, surgical procedures and complications was conducted. Minimum follow-up was 12 months after placement of the definitive implant.ResultsThere was no statistically significant difference in the rate of capsular contracture in the two groups. Rippling occurred more in DTI reconstruction. In the two-stages reconstruction, lipofilling was applied more often and there was a higher incidence of seroma. Patient satisfaction extrapolated from the Breast Q questionnaire was better for patients submitted to two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction.ConclusionDual-stage pre-pectoral reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix appears to be a good reconstructive solution in patients with relative contraindications for one-stage heterologous reconstruction with definitive prosthesis and no desire for autologous reconstruction.