Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019

01-04-2019 | Original Article

Standardized Practice Reduces Complications in Breast Augmentation: Results with the First 290 Consecutive Cases Versus Non-standardized Comparators

Authors: Adriano Santorelli, Ferdinando Rossano, Barbara Cagli, Stefano Avvedimento, Ali Ghanem, Sergio Marlino

Published in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Issue 2/2019

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Several systematic methods for breast augmentation have been published, providing key principles and technical steps for minimizing complications and optimizing patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to compare complication rates in patients receiving a breast augmentation performed using a structured, standardized approach versus comparator patients operated on without a standardized approach.

Methods

This was a single-center, retrospective review of 290 consecutive breast augmentations performed between October 2016 and September 2017 based on a standardized technique (Randquist’s “five P’s” combined with Adams’ 14-point plan), and 235 comparators who underwent breast augmentations prior to standardization between April 2014 and September 2016. All study subjects were females aged ≥ 18 years, undergoing bilateral breast augmentation, either alone or in the context of augmentation mastopexy or implant replacement. Various implant ranges were used before standardization; most (94.8%) of the standardized procedures used Natrelle® devices. Follow-up lasted for ≥ 12 months.

Results

Significantly fewer patients in the standardized surgery group experienced complications (14.5%, n = 42) compared with the non-standardized group [29.4%, n = 69; Chi square = 6.57; degrees of freedom (df) = 1; p = 0.01041]. Complication rates were also significantly lower in the standardized surgery group for each of the three types of breast augmentation surgery assessed separately. Reoperation rates with standardized and non-standardized surgery were 4.1% (n = 12) and 11.9% (n = 28), respectively (Chi square = 6.4; df = 1; p = 0.01145). Patient satisfaction was increased post-surgery in both groups.

Conclusions

The use of a structured, standardized approach to breast augmentation reduced the risk of postoperative complications.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
2.
go back to reference Kapoor NS (2017) Common and less-common complications associated with breast implants. Ann Womens Health 1:1002 Kapoor NS (2017) Common and less-common complications associated with breast implants. Ann Womens Health 1:1002
3.
go back to reference Hedén P, Jernbeck J, Hober M (2001) Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world’s largest current experience. Clin Plast Surg 28:531–552PubMed Hedén P, Jernbeck J, Hober M (2001) Breast augmentation with anatomical cohesive gel implants: the world’s largest current experience. Clin Plast Surg 28:531–552PubMed
4.
go back to reference Randquist C, Gribbe O (2010) Highly cohesive textured form stable gel implants: principles and technique. In: Hall-Findlay EJ, Evans G (eds) Aesthetic and reconstructive surgery of the breast. Saunders Ltd, Philadelphia, pp 339–355CrossRef Randquist C, Gribbe O (2010) Highly cohesive textured form stable gel implants: principles and technique. In: Hall-Findlay EJ, Evans G (eds) Aesthetic and reconstructive surgery of the breast. Saunders Ltd, Philadelphia, pp 339–355CrossRef
5.
go back to reference Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK et al (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: Experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431CrossRefPubMed Adams WP Jr, Culbertson EJ, Deva AK et al (2017) Macrotextured breast implants with defined steps to minimize bacterial contamination around the device: Experience in 42,000 implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:427–431CrossRefPubMed
7.
go back to reference Del Pozo JL, Tran NV, Petty PM et al (2009) Pilot study of association of bacteria on breast implants with capsular contracture. J Clin Microbiol 47:1333–1337CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Del Pozo JL, Tran NV, Petty PM et al (2009) Pilot study of association of bacteria on breast implants with capsular contracture. J Clin Microbiol 47:1333–1337CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB (2002) A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:1396–1409CrossRefPubMed Tebbetts JB (2002) A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. Plast Reconstr Surg 109:1396–1409CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Tebbetts JB, Adams WP (2005) Five critical decisions in breast augmentation using five measurements in 5 minutes: the high five decision support process. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:2005–2016PubMed Tebbetts JB, Adams WP (2005) Five critical decisions in breast augmentation using five measurements in 5 minutes: the high five decision support process. Plast Reconstr Surg 116:2005–2016PubMed
10.
go back to reference Riggio E, Ardoino I, Richardson CE, Biganzoli E (2017) Predictability of anthropomorphic measurements in implant selection for breast reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Plast Surg 40:203–212CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Riggio E, Ardoino I, Richardson CE, Biganzoli E (2017) Predictability of anthropomorphic measurements in implant selection for breast reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study. Eur J Plast Surg 40:203–212CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Goodwin SJ, McCarthy CM, Pusic AL et al (2005) Complications in smokers after postmastectomy tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 55:16–19CrossRefPubMed Goodwin SJ, McCarthy CM, Pusic AL et al (2005) Complications in smokers after postmastectomy tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 55:16–19CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Bamba R, Gupta V, Shack RB, Grotting JC, Higdon KK (2016) Evaluation of diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for major complications in patients undergoing aesthetic surgery. Aesthet Surg J 36:598–608CrossRefPubMed Bamba R, Gupta V, Shack RB, Grotting JC, Higdon KK (2016) Evaluation of diabetes mellitus as a risk factor for major complications in patients undergoing aesthetic surgery. Aesthet Surg J 36:598–608CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Montemurro P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S, Heden P (2017) Implementation of an integrated biodimensional method of breast augmentation with anatomic, highly cohesive silicone gel implants: Short-term results with the first 620 consecutive cases. Aesthet Surg J 37:782–792CrossRefPubMed Montemurro P, Agko M, Quattrini Li A, Avvedimento S, Heden P (2017) Implementation of an integrated biodimensional method of breast augmentation with anatomic, highly cohesive silicone gel implants: Short-term results with the first 620 consecutive cases. Aesthet Surg J 37:782–792CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Montemurro P, Cheema M, Heden P, Agko M, Quattrinin Li A, Avvedimento S (2018) Do not fear an implant’s shape: a single surgeon’s experience of over 1200 round and shaped textured implants in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 38:254–261CrossRefPubMed Montemurro P, Cheema M, Heden P, Agko M, Quattrinin Li A, Avvedimento S (2018) Do not fear an implant’s shape: a single surgeon’s experience of over 1200 round and shaped textured implants in primary breast augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 38:254–261CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Berretta M, Di Francia R, Tirelli U (2014) Editorial: the new oncologic challenges in the 3RD millennium. World Cancer Res J 1:e133 Berretta M, Di Francia R, Tirelli U (2014) Editorial: the new oncologic challenges in the 3RD millennium. World Cancer Res J 1:e133
16.
go back to reference Clemens MW, Medeiros LJ, Butler CE et al (2016) Complete surgical excision is essential for the management of patients with breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 34:160–168CrossRefPubMed Clemens MW, Medeiros LJ, Butler CE et al (2016) Complete surgical excision is essential for the management of patients with breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 34:160–168CrossRefPubMed
17.
go back to reference Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Pileri SA et al (2016) The 2016 revision of the World Health Organization classification of lymphoid neoplasms. Blood 127:2375–2390CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Swerdlow SH, Campo E, Pileri SA et al (2016) The 2016 revision of the World Health Organization classification of lymphoid neoplasms. Blood 127:2375–2390CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Loch-Wilkinson A, Beath KJ, Knight RJW et al (2017) Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: high-surface-area textured implants are associated with increased risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:645–654CrossRefPubMed Loch-Wilkinson A, Beath KJ, Knight RJW et al (2017) Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma in Australia and New Zealand: high-surface-area textured implants are associated with increased risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 140:645–654CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172CrossRefPubMed Namnoum JD, Largent J, Kaplan HM, Oefelein MG, Brown MH (2013) Primary breast augmentation clinical trial outcomes stratified by surgical incision, anatomical placement and implant device type. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66:1165–1172CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Maxwell GP, Scheflan M, Spear S, Nava MB, Hedén P (2014) Benefits and limitations of macrotextured breast implants and consensus recommendations for optimizing their effectiveness. Aesthet Surg J 34:876–881CrossRefPubMed Maxwell GP, Scheflan M, Spear S, Nava MB, Hedén P (2014) Benefits and limitations of macrotextured breast implants and consensus recommendations for optimizing their effectiveness. Aesthet Surg J 34:876–881CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Standardized Practice Reduces Complications in Breast Augmentation: Results with the First 290 Consecutive Cases Versus Non-standardized Comparators
Authors
Adriano Santorelli
Ferdinando Rossano
Barbara Cagli
Stefano Avvedimento
Ali Ghanem
Sergio Marlino
Publication date
01-04-2019
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Issue 2/2019
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Electronic ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-018-1291-y

Other articles of this Issue 2/2019

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2/2019 Go to the issue