CHAPTER 15: AESTHETICS - GENERAL, BREAST, ABDO Flashcards
(123 cards)
Aesthetic assessment
what is patient’s perceived problem?
what are their expectations?
why do they want surgery?
any prev surgery?
Green flag S ecure Y oung L istens V erbal I ntelligent A ttractive
Red flag S ingle I mmature M ale O verly expectant N arcassistic
What are the properties of an ideal implant?
SCALES (1953) TIP Sterilisable non Carcinogenic non ALlergenic chemically inErt resistant to mechanical Strains
impervious to Tissue fluids
non Irritant
Plastic (can be fabricated to desired form)
History of breast implants and silicone controversy
1895 1st augment = giant lipoma from back (Czerny)
1944 dermis fat grafts (Berson)
1954 dermis fat flaps (Longacre)
1945 Japanese prostitutes injected liquid silicone
1962 1st silicone prosthesis Dow Corning (Cronin, Gerow)
Van Nunen (1982) reported 3 cases of connective tissue disease
1991 $7.34 million awarded to Marianne Hopkins for autoimmune disease + silicone
1992 FDA bans silicone implants (Spain & France)
1994 class action lawsuit. Compensation if pt developed CTD within 30yrs of implant
but DoH found no reason for ban and Mayo clinic study = no link
1995 Dow Corning filed for bankruptcy
1998 DoH independent review NO link (Sturrock)
2006 FDA approves use in >21yr olds
1998 UK INDEPENDENT REVIEW
- controversies: ?inc autoimmune, ?inc breast ca, ?difficulties in breast cancer screening
- findings: not associated with higher health risks cf other implants, including autoimmune
- need registry & monitoring as inc risk of local complications (rupture, capsules)
1999 IMNAS (Institute of medicine of national academy of science)
- no evidence of assoc with major diseases, bresat ca
- not contraindicated in breast feeding (have more silicone / silica in bottle teats, formula and cows milk)
What is silicone?
polydimethyl siloxate - polymer of silicon
What are the indications for breast augmentation
Patients:
(a) considered for many yrs, recently came into money, deep rooted inadequacy
(b) want immediately e.g. postpartum
3 groups
congenital breast hypoplasia
postpartum involution
exhibitionist
Scott Spears contraindications for BBA?
PULSE DOOMED Poor historian Unco-operative Litigious Surgaholic unrealistic Expectations
Depressed OCD Over flattering Minimal / imagined deformity Extremely rude inDecisive
What are the main reasons for dissatisfaction postop?
poor preop info
poor communication
physical difficulties / complications
Poor results likely
- ptosis
- thin small chests
- tubular breasts
- chest wall deformity
- body builders
- asymmetry
PREOP ASSESSMENT
HISTORY
- menarche
- pregnancy
- breast ca / lumps, discharge
- FHx
- why BBA?
- smoking, conditions related to wound healing
- anticoagulants
- PMH, SHX, THX, ALLERGIES
ONCOLOGICAL EXAMINATION
LOOK
- skin quality (tone, elasticity, striae)
- proportions, height:weight
- asymmetry (breast size, chest wall, scoliosis, IMF, NAC)
- shape of thorax (pectus ex / car)
- Poland’s
- posture / scoliosis
FEEL / PALPATE
- pinch test (2cm superior pole, and inf pole)
MEASURE
- sternal nipple dist
- nipple to IMF dist
- base width
- ant pull skin stretch
- NAC - IMF dist under max stretch
What are the goals of BBA?
natural fuller figure
improve breast shape
maintaining balance b/t native breast tissue & implant within soft tissue envelope
balance desires of pt with tissue reality
highlight potential compromises to pt
What happens to breast tissue after implants?
Tebbetts 2001 - >350ml implant induces predictable -ve consequences over time on breast tissues
Nahas 2001 - progressive reduction in breast size due to
- parenchymal atrophy
- costal cartilage remodelling
What are Tebbetts High FIve?
PRS Supp 2006
Used for surgical decision making
1. Optimal soft-tissue coverage / pocket location
- Implant volume
- Implant type, size, dimensions
- Optimal location for inframammary fold
- Incision location
Explanation of Tebbetts high five
- Optimal soft-tissue coverage/pocket location for the implant. This determines future risks of visible traction rippling, visible or palpable implant edges, and possible risks of excessive stretch or extrusion.
- Implant volume (weight). This determines implant effects on tissues over time, risks of excessive stretch, excessive thinning, visible or palpable implant edges, visible traction rippling, ptosis, and parenchymal atrophy.
- Implant type, size, and dimensions. This determines control over distribution of fill within the breast; adequacy of envelope fill; and risks of excessive stretch, excessive thinning, visible or palpable implant edges, visible traction rippling, ptosis, and parenchymal atrophy.
- Optimal location for the inframammary fold based on the width of the implant selected for augmentation. This determines the position of the breast on the chest wall, the critical aesthetic relationship between breast width and nipple-to-fold distance, and distribution of fill (especially upper pole fill).
- Incision location. This determines degree of trauma to adjacent soft tissues, exposure of implant to endogenous bacteria in the breast tissue, surgeon visibility and control, potential injury to adjacent neurovasculature, and potential postoperative morbidity or tradeoffs.
TEPID system
TEPID system
tissue characteristics of the breast (T),
envelope (E),
parenchyma (P),
implant (I),
dimensions (D) and dynamics of the implant relative to the soft tissues for breast implant selection, based on the patient’s individual tissue characteristics and breast dimensions
Implant shape: Round vs anatomical?
Tebbetts 2001 - anatomical better if
- pt wants more lower pole projection
- want max size for volume (weight issue)
- have glandular ptotic breasts
- constricted lower poles
- highly mobile parenchyma so may slide off -> double bubble effect
Anatomical - better breast shape, better control of upper pole, prevent upper shell folding, collapse & shell failure
Sheflan - anatomical better if skin envelope is tight
What are the different types of implant constituents?
silicone gel saline inflatable double lumen salin-gel filled (Beckers) polyurethane-covered gel filled Polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP) hydrogel
Describe the classification for capsular contracture?
Baker 1975 - 4 grades 1 soft (no contracture) 2 palpable 3 visible 4 painful
What are the theories behind capsular contracture?
- Biofilm disease (Pajkos PRS 2003) subacute Staph epidermidis infection
- hypertrophic scar formation (fibroblastic foreign body type reaction)
Capsular contracture rate
smooth 50%, textured 8-10% (Collis & Sharpe PRS 2000)
What materials can be used to revise bottoming out?
prolene mesh (Frank - Indiana)
alloderm, mesh (Spear) 15-20% need re-revision
Strattice in UK?
What is the pathology behind silicone synovitis?
Macrophages phagocytose silicone bleed
silicone cannot be lysed by lysosome
macrophage ruptures, re-releasing particles
What is the association between breast cancers and a rare form of cancer?
FDA announced a possible association between breast implants and the development of anaplastic large cell lymphoma (ALCL), a rare type of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.
To date, ~60 cases of ALCL in women with breast implants that were identified, small fraction of 5-10 million breast implants worldwide
What are the causes of synmastia?
implants too wide
subglandular pocket made too medial
What is the management of BBA? RWS 13S
RWS AUGMENTATION TECHNIQUE
Outpatient visit - 13 S’:
Size – bra size
Shape – tubular, ptosis
Symmetry → breasts, nipples, chest wall
Silicone issues
Style→ Measure breast base transverse diameter, round/anatomical, projection (In ptosis the nipple moves down and laterally → low profile wide base is needed with Nagor round non cohesive gel.)
Site → subglandular (if enough soft tissue in upper pole), subpectoral
Skin Scar → IMF usually
Sub Scar → Capsule
Sensation changes
Suction drains
Stay → 2 days in hospital, drains
Support → sports bra for 6/52 night and day then 3/12 during the day
Screening
Describe the procedure of BA
Mark → IMF only pre op
On table measure from nipple down 5 cm this should be approx at IMF, then site scar slightly above this. Measure 2 cm medial and 3 cm lateral to breast meridian.
Cut through dermis then raise a fat/fascial tongue flap inferiorly to allow layered closure at the end of the procedure.
Identify placement plane (subglandular or subpectoral) outline pocket, haemostasis, suction drain → wash implant in 50% betadine solution then put in (sideways if wider base shape) → rotate into place. Close fat flap onto chest wall to outline the IMF then layered Vicryl and subcut prolene (ROS 2/52).
3 doses of Cefuroxime, drains out when serous.
What is dual plane approach?
Who described it?
Tebbets PRS 2001
Type 1
- release inferior insertion of pec major (do NOT divide muscle along sternum except white tendinous insertions to avoid visible retraction along sternum and palpable implant edge)
- for patients with entire breast parenchyma above IMF, with tight attachments of parenchyma to muscle, and short nipple to IMF distance (5-6.5cm under stretch)
Type 2
- division of muscle - parenchymal attachments up to inferior edge of NAC
- for pts with most breast tissue above IMF, looser attachments of breast to muscle and NAC-IMF 5-6.5cm under stretch
Type 3
- division of muscle-parenchymal attachments up to superior edge of NAC
- for pts with very loose attachments and NAC-IMF 7-8cm, or tuberous breast deformity, constricted lower pole with radial parenchyma scoring