PEER-REVIEW | BREAST IMPLANT COMPLICATIONS |


of abnormal movement of the


implants with muscle contraction. She was quite pleased with the results. Postoperative photographs were taken 3 weeks after treatment (Figure 4). The authors’ opinion of the result of the operative revision was in line with the patient’s.


Just as many techniques exist as there are


implant devices. No matter the implant type or the technique used, complications may well occur. These complications often require another operation to correct the problem.


Discussion Hundreds of thousands of implant-based breast surgeries are performed worldwide each year. Breast implant devices are numerous, ranging from gel to saline, smooth to textured, round to anatomic, and adjustable to non- adjustable. Just as many techniques exist as there are implant devices. No matter the type of implant or the technique used, complications may well occur. These complications often require another operation to correct the problem. A recent 5-year follow-up of a line of


breast implants showed a risk of reoperation of 23.8 % 7


. The use of


acellular dermal matrices has become very popular in implant-based revision surgery8


. A study by Spear et al showed that these matrices could be 30 ❚ May/June 2013 | prime-journal.com


incorporated in the treatment of capsular contracture, rippling, implant malposition, and soft tissue thinning 9


. muscle, and can smooth surface abnormalities 10


The use of these matrices in revision breast surgery allow additional support to the lower pole of the breast and implant, extend the pectoralis .


In this article, the authors have reported on a case in Figure 3 The TIGR Matrix


which a patient had previously undergone a bilateral breast augmentation with implants and multiple revisions, including bilateral mastopexy by another surgeon. She was unhappy with the results and was seen in consultation for synmastia and breast asymmetry that worsened with muscle contraction. She was then electively taken to the operating room and had an augmentation revision performed using the new synthetic long-term absorbable mesh, TIGR® Matrix, as an alternative to acellular dermal matrices. TIGR® Matrix is the first synthetic


long-term resorbable surgical mesh. It is a copolymer of glycolide, lactide, and trimethylene carbonate. Pre-clinical trials of this mesh show that it is vascularised very rapidly


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76