Affiliation:
1. Corewell Health/Michigan State University, Integrated Plastic Surgery Residency, Grand Rapids, Mich.
2. Advanced Plastic Surgery, Grand Rapids, Mich.
3. Corewell Health, Scholarly Activity and Scientific Support Team, Grand Rapids, Mich.
Abstract
Summary:
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is aesthetically superior to skin-sparing only mastectomy or reconstructed nipples. However, nipple-sparing mastectomy partially preserves nipple ducts, which are remaining communications between the environment and breast pocket that can potentially allow bacteria transfer and compromise the prosthesis. Previous methods to create a subareolar “barrier” to reduce through-duct bacteria penetration involve subpectoral implant placement, adjunct meshes or acellular dermal matrix, and external nipple adhesives. To further protect the implant from nipple-derived contamination, we propose subareolar sealant (SAS). SAS involves the application of a synthetic sealant on the nipple undersurface before implant placement. In our study, we analyzed 77 breasts that received prepectoral prosthetic breast reconstruction. SAS was used in 70 of 77 breasts. All breasts received adjunctive acellular dermal matrix. Comparing SAS versus no-SAS, we found that no-SAS was associated with 10.4-fold more infections (P = 0.032) and 17.3-fold more re-hospitalizations (P = 0.017). No-SAS also resulted in more “at least one major complication” (P < 0.001), capsular contracture (P < 0.001), and necrosis requiring surgery (P < 0.001). Due to the small no-SAS sample size, goodness-of-fit (Quasi-likelihood independence model) criteria was applied, and a post hoc power analysis was calculated. Erythema, all minor complications, dehiscence, and necrosis requiring surgery remained significant (all P < 0.0001). This innovative technique markedly reduces overall minor complications and necrosis requiring surgery. A larger no-SAS sample size is required to adequately determine whether SAS reduces infection and hospitalization rates. Nonetheless, SAS reduces complications and is cost effective compared with other adjunct materials.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)