Objectives: Poner a consideracion nuestra conducta en la explantacion de Implantes Mamarios, en pacientes que no desean continuar con los mismos.
Alternativas quirurgicas y evolucion.

Introduction: Numerosas pacientes concurren a la consulta a los efectos de retiro de implantes, como consecuencia de contracturas capsulares de larga data, extrusion post aumento o reconstruccion mamaria, o con temor de la presencia de Linfoma Anaplasico de Celulas Gigantes .
Lo que implica una reduccion drastica de volumen, asi como la consecuente exceso de tejido cutaneo, lo que amerita una reubicacion de este ultimo, y devolver un volumen aceptable desde el punto de vista estetico.

Materials / method: Se presenta la experiencia del Servicio de Cirugia Plastica del Parque de la Salud (asistencial sin cobertura), y la Clinica de Cirugia Plastica del autor, de pacientes que consultaron post reconstruccion mamaria post Cancer de mama, malformaciones Congenitas, asi como mastoplastias esteticas en los ultimos 10 años.-

Results: La indicacion del procedimiento adecuado para devolver volumen y posicion a aquellas pacientes en las que se les realizo retiro de implantes por deseo de las misma, extrusion del implante, rotura intracapsular, contractura baker grado III - IV, con temor de desarrollar Linfoma Anaplasico de Celulas Gigantes, etc.

Conclusion: La solucion de acuerdo al grado de deformidad ocasionada por el retiro de volumen (implante), y el reemplazo del mismo , asi como el reposicionamiento, es un desafio del Cirujano Plastico, ameritando la utilizacion de aquellas estrategias y tecnicas quirurgicas que garantizen un resultado estetico satisfactorio.

Disclosures

Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No

Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No

Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No

Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No

This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability

Objectives: This review and analysis of studies permits to place our personal experience in breast implant surgery in a scientific framework concerning factors potentially influencing the development of capsular contracture.

Introduction: We 'll present an overview and analysis of literature concerning capsular contracture

Materials / method: Published studies are analysed , concerning influencing factors of evolution of capsular contracture after breast implant surgery : infection, influence of implant envelope ( textured, smooth) , position of the implant ( subglandular, subfacial, dual plane, submuscular,) , incision ( areola, submammary fold, axillar), genetique factors etc.

Results: Capsular contracture is a multifactorial caused complication of breast implant surgery with a higher incidence than often believed.

Conclusion: For our patients and as plastic surgeons we need to be “updated” about science and myths of capsular contracture and possible techniques to lower potentially the complication rate.

Disclosures

Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No

Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No

Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No

Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No

This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability

Objectives: Description of a safety technique to correct severe ptosis in gigantomastia: a dermal enlarged flap to avoid nipple graft

Introduction: Surgery to reduce gigantomastia and severe ptosis requires notable lifting of the areola and runs the risk of its necrosis. Areolar grafting is often the solution. We devised a mammaplasty technique with a Supero-Bilateral Enlarged Dermal (SBED) pedicle to avoid this graft.

Materials / method: between January 2002 and January 2021, 104 patients with a sternal notch-to-nipple distance ≥ 40 cm underwent surgery using this superior pedicle technique with a wider base for the nipple-bearing flap harboring, partially or totally, the two (internal and external) vertical branches.

Results: Mean jugular notch to nipple distance was 43.7 cm [40-52], mean breast ptosis was 14 cm [11-22], and mean brassiere size was 42DD [40D-48DD+]. Mean weight reduction was 1395 g/breast. Areolar necrosis never occurred, 14 patients presented early minor scar disunion with prolonged healing time and 8 patients experienced postoperative inflammation with lymphorrhea. The result was considered highly or very highly satisfactory by 94 percent of the patients.

Conclusion: Mammaplasty with Superobilateral Enlarged Dermal Pedicle is an efficient and safe technique, which avoids free nipple graft technique in gigantomastia with extreme ptosis.

Disclosures

Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No

Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No

Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No

Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No

This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability

Disclosures

Did you receive any funding to support your research for this TOPIC?
No

Were you provided with any honoraria, payment or other compensation for your work on this study?
No

Do you have any financial relationship with any entity which may closely compete with the medications, materials or instruments covered by your study?
No

Do you own or have you applied for any patents in conjunction with the instruments, medications or materials discussed in your study?
No

This work was not supported by any direct or non direct funding. It is under the author's own responsability