Augmentation mastopexy and augmentation mammoplasty: an analysis of 1,406 consecutive cases

Abstract

Aim: Simultaneous augmentation mastopexy is a challenging operation for esthetic plastic surgeons. Complication and revision rates following augmentation mammoplasty or mastopexy are less commonly seen when these two procedures are performed separately. However, when the two procedures are combined, the complication rate is reported exponentially higher when compared with its individual component carried out separately. The current retrospective chart review is a comparative analysis of the two procedures performed by a single surgeon.

Methods: Retrospective data were collected using patient’s charts. All patients who had augmentation mammoplasty (Group A) or simultaneous augmentation with mastopexy (Group B) in muscle splitting biplane using round cohesive gel textured silicone implants by a single surgeon were included.

Results: A total of 1,406 patients had consecutive augmentation mammoplasty or simultaneous augmentation mastopexy. Augmentation mammoplasty (Group A) included 1,298 and simultaneous augmentation with mastopexy (Group B) had 108 patients, respectively. The mean age of the patients in Group A and B was 29.6 years and 32.2 years, respectively (P = 0.006). The mean size of the implants in Group A and B was 340 mL and 308 mL (P = 0.001), respectively. Wound infection in Group A and B was seen in 0.6% and 3.7%, respectively. Wound breakdown was seen in 1.1% in Group A as compared to 6.5% in Group B (P = 0.001). Revision surgeries were performed in 1.4% and 11.1% of Group A and B, respectively (P = 0.001).

Conclusion: There was a statistically and clinically significant higher rate of complications and revision rate noted in simultaneous augmentation with mastopexy (Group B) as compared to augmentation mammoplasty alone (Group A). However, the rise in complications rate is sum of the complications of the two individual components performed and not exponential.

Keywords

Breast asymmetries / breast ptosis / muscle splitting augmentation / muscle splitting mastopexy / revision augmentation mammoplasty / revision augmentation mastopexy

References

[1] The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery's Cosmetic Surgery National Data Bank: Statistics; 2013. Available from:http://www.surgery.org/media/statistics. [Last accessed on 2015 Oct 09].

[2] Khan UD.Secondary augmentation mammoplasties and periprosthetic infection: a three-year retrospective review..Aesthet Surg J2012;32:465-73

[3] Tebbetts JB.Achieving a zero percent reoperation rate at 3 years in a 50-consecutive-case augmentation mammoplasty premarket approval study..Plast Reconstr Surg2006;118:1453-7

[4] Khan UD.The impact of preoperative breast implant selection on the 3-year reoperation rate..Eur J Plast Surg2013;36:503-10

[5] Cunningham B.The mentor core study on silicone memorygel breast implants..Plast Reconstr Surg2007;120:19S-29S

[6] Mentor Corporation. Saline Filled Breast Implant Surgery: Making an informed Decision. Mentor Corp, Santa Barbara, Calif. Available from: https://www.mentordirect.com.au/sites/mentordirect.com.au/files/doc/79549_Mentor_MID_Brochure_v0.pdf [Last accessed on 2015 Sep 09].

[7] Heden P,Murphy DK,Walker PS.Style 410 cohesive silicone breast implants: safety and effectiveness at 5 to 9 years after implantation..Plast Reconstr Surg2006;118:1281-7

[8] Khan UD.Muscle-splitting, subglandular and partial submuscular augmentation mammoplasties: a 12-year retrospective analysis of 2026 primary cases..Aesthetic Plast Surg2013;37:290-302

[9] Handel N,Gutierrez J.A long-term study of outcomes, complications, and patient satisfaction with breast implants..Plast Reconstr Surg2006;117:757-67

[10] Khan UD.Vertical scar mastopexy with cat's tail extension for prevention of skin redundancy: an experience with 17 consecutive cases after mastopexy and mastopexy with breast augmentation..Aesthetic Plast Surg2012;36:303-7

[11] Stevens WG,Freeman ME,Hirsch EM.Is one-stage breast augmentation with mastopexy safe and effective? A review of 186 primary cases..Aesthet Surg J2006;26:674-81

[12] Discussion..A 15-year experience with primary breast augmentation..Plast Reconstr Surg2011;127:1301-13

[13] Spear S.Augmentation/mastopexy: "surgeon, beware"..Plast Reconstr Surg2003;112:905-6

[14] Spear SL,Menon N.One-stage augmentation combined with mastopexy: aesthetic results and patient satisfaction..Aesthetic Plast Surg2004;28:259-67

[15] Stevens WG,Spring M,Chacón CO.One-stage augmentation mastopexy: a review of 1192 simultaneous breast augmentation and mastopexy procedures in 615 consecutive patients..Aesthet Surg J2014;34:723-32

[16] Khan UD.Breast augmentation, antibiotic prophylaxis, and infection: comparative analysis of 1,628 primary augmentation mammoplasties assessing the role and effi cacy of antibiotic prophylaxis duration..Aesthetic Plast Surg2010;34:42-7

[17] Khan UD.Augmentation mastopexy in muscle-splitting biplane: outcome of first 44 consecutive cases of mastopexies in a new pocket..Aesthetic Plast Surg2010;34:313-21

[18] Calobrace MB,Cothron KJ.Simultaneous augmentation/mastopexy: a retrospective 5-year review of 332 consecutive cases..Plast Reconstr Surg2013;131:145-56

[19] Swanson E.Prospective comparative clinical evaluation of 784 consecutive cases of breast augmentation and vertical mammoplasty, performed individually and in a combination..Plast Reconstr Surg2013;132:30e-45e

[20] Khan UD.Selection of breast pocket using pinch test in augmentation mammoplasty: can it be relied in long term?.Aesthetic Plast Surg2009;33:780-1

[21] Spear SL,Clemens MW.Augmentation/mastopexy: a 3-year review of a single surgeon's practice..Plast Reconstr Surg2006;118:136S-47S

[22] Mugea TT.Aesthetic Surgery of the Brest. 1st ed.2015;Berlin, HeidelbergSpringer-Verlag649-56

[23] Stevens WG,Stoker DA,Cohen R.One-stage mastopexy with breast augmentation: a review of 321 patients..Plast Reconstr Surg2007;120:1674-9