Analysis of factors and errors affecting the development of complications after breast reconstruction with silicone implants in cancer patients

Cover Page

Cite item

Full Text

Abstract

Currently, breast reconstruction with silicone endoprostheses has become widespread. This was facilitated by the simplicity of the surgical technique, rapid recovery of patients, and the availability of high-quality synthetic and biological materials. With one-stage breast reconstruction, optimal aesthetic results can be achieved in one surgical intervention. However, some factors can make adjustments to the reconstruction result. Most foreign and Russian publications are devoted to the effect of radiation therapy on the development of complications after the use of silicone endoprostheses/tissue expanders. In our article, we analyzed studies devoted to the analysis of the influence of various factors that can provoke the development of infection, implant protrusion, and other complications. Taking into account all possible criteria at the preoperative, postoperative stages, and directly during surgery, it is possible to significantly reduce the risks of implant loss and reoperations.

About the authors

E. A. Troshenkov

P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

Author for correspondence.

3 2nd Botkinsky proezd, Moscow 125284

Russian Federation

M. Yu. Vlasova

P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

3 2nd Botkinsky proezd, Moscow 125284

Russian Federation

A. D. Zikiryakhodjaev

P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia; I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia (Sechenov University); Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia n. a. Patrice Lumumba

3 2nd Botkinsky proezd, Moscow 125284

Bld. 2, 8 Trubetskaya St., Moscow 119991

6 Miklukho-Maklaya St., Moscow 117198

Russian Federation

A. D. Kaprin

P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia; I.M. Sechenov First Moscow State Medical University, Ministry of Health of Russia (Sechenov University); Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia n. a. Patrice Lumumba; A.F. Tsyb Medical Radiology Research Center – branch of the National Medical Research Radiology Center, Ministry of Health of Russia

3 2nd Botkinsky proezd, Moscow 125284

Bld. 2, 8 Trubetskaya St., Moscow 119991

6 Miklukho-Maklaya St., Moscow 117198

4 Koroleva St., Obninsk 249036

Russian Federation

D. S. Malik

A.F. Tsyb Medical Radiology Research Center – branch of the National Medical Research Radiology Center, Ministry of Health of Russia

4 Koroleva St., Obninsk 249036

Russian Federation

F. N. Usov

P.A. Herzen Moscow Research Institute of Oncology – branch of the National Medical Research Center of Radiology, Ministry of Health of Russia

3 2nd Botkinsky proezd, Moscow 125284

Russian Federation

References

  1. Statistics from the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Available at: https://www.plasticsurgery.org (In Russ.).
  2. Vlasova M.Yu., Zikiryakhodzhaev A.D., Reshetov I.V. et al. Complications after simultaneous prepectoral breast reconstruction using polyurethane-coated implants in patients with breast cancer. Opukholi zhenskoy reproduktivnoy systemy = Tumors of female reproductive system 2020;16(4):12–20. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17650/1994-4098-2020-16-4-12-20
  3. Krivorotko P.V., Bessonov A.A., Pesotsky R.S. et al. Reconstruction of the mammary glands using an endoprosthesis and a titanium-coated mesh implant TiLoop Bra®. Study guide. St. Petersburg: National Medical Research Center for Oncology, 2021. 56 p. (In Russ.).
  4. Власова М.Ю., Зикиряходжаев А.Д., Решетов И.В. и др. Препекторальная установка полиуретанового имплантата после подкожной мастэктомии у больных раком молочной железы. Researchʼn Practical Medicine Journal 2020;7(3):63–73. doi: 10.17709/2409-2231-2020-7-3-6
  5. Vlasova M.Yu., Zikiryakhodzhaev A.D., Reshetov I.V. et al. Prepectoral reconstruction with polyurethane-coated implant after skin-sparing mastectomy in patients with breast cancer.
  6. Research and Practical Medicine Journal. 2020;7(3):63-73. (In Russ.). doi: 10.17709/2409-2231-2020-7-3-6
  7. Malygin S.E. Reconstructive plastic surgery in breast cancer. Prakticheskaya onkologiya = Practical Oncology 2002;3(1):69–76. (In Russ.).
  8. Bergmann P.A., Tamouridis G., Lohmeyer J.A. et al. The effect of a bacterial contamination on the formation of capsular contracture with polyurethane breast implants in comparison with textured silicone implants: an animal study. J Plast Reconstr Aesth Surg 2014;67(10):1364–70. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.05.040
  9. Sinclair T.M., Kerrigan C.L., Buntic R. Biodegradation of the polyurethane foam covering of breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 1993;92(6):1003–13; discussion 1014.
  10. Yarygin M.L., Sobolevskiy V.A., Egorov Yu.S., Yarygin L.M. Complications after reconstructive implantation of silicone endoprostheses in patients with breast cancer. Khirurgiya. Zhurnal im. N.I. Pirogova = Pirogov Russian Journal of Surgery 2011;(6): 11–7. (In Russ.).
  11. Negenborn V.L., Dikmans R.E.G., Bouman M.B. et al. Predictors of complications after direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial. J Br Surg 2018;105(10):1305– 12. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10865
  12. Su C.L., Yang J.R., Kuo W.L. et al. Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictive factors of adverse surgical outcomes in Asian patients. Arch Plast Surg 2021;48(5):483–93. doi: 10.5999/aps.2021.00374
  13. Kalstrup J., Balslev Willert C., Brinch-Møller Weitemeyer M. et al. Immediate direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: evaluation of complications and safety. Breast 2021;60:192–8. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.10.006
  14. Mrad M.A., Al Qurashi A.A., Shah Mardan Q.N.M. et al. Predictors of complications after breast reconstruction surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2022;10(12):e4693. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004693
  15. Vlasova M.Yu. Simultaneous prepectoral reconstruction with polyurethane-coated implants in breast cancer. Dis. … cand. med. sci. Moscow, 2021. 139 p. (In Russ.).
  16. Khodorovich O.S., Solodkiy V.A., Kalinina-Masri A.A. et al. Experience with prepectoral implant-based reconstruction for breast cancer. R.M.J. Meditsinskoe obozreniye = Russian Medical Inquiry 2023;7(6):366–71. (In Russ.). doi: 10.32364/2587-6821-2023-7-6-5
  17. Kozlov R.S., Kaprin A.D., Andreeva I.V. et al. Practical guidelines for antibiotic prescribing in breast surgery: antibiotic prophylaxis and treatment of surgical site infections and implantassociated infections. Klinicheskaya mikrobiologiya i antibakterialnaya terapiya = Clinical Microbiology and Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2024;26(3):244–73. (In Russ.). doi: 10.36488/cmac.2024.3.244273
  18. Wiener T.C. Relationship of incision choice to capsular contracture. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008;32(2):303–6. doi: 10.1007/s00266-007-9061-2
  19. Barr S.P., Topps A.R., Barnes N.L.P. et al. Infection prevention in breast implant surgery – a review of the surgical evidence, guidelines and a checklist. Eur J Surg Oncol 2016;42(5):591–603. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.02.240
  20. Shirokikh I.M. Use of autologous, biological, and synthetic materials in reconstructive surgery for breast cancer. Dis. … cand. med. sci. Moscow, 2019. 180 p. (In Russ.).
  21. Khakimova Sh.G. Algorithm for choosing a reconstruction method in breast cancer. Dis. … doct. med. sci. Moscow, 2024. 302 p. (In Russ.).
  22. Cutress R.I., Summerhayes C., Rainsbury R. Guidelines for oncoplastic breast reconstruction. The Annals of The Royal College of Surgeons of England. Ann R Coll Surg Engl 2013;95(3):161–2. doi: 10.1308/003588413X13511609957696
  23. Mangram A.J., Horan T.C., Pearson M.L. et al. Guideline for prevention of surgical site infection, 1999. Hospital Infection Control Practices Advisory Committee. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 1999;20(4):250–78; quiz 279–80. doi: 10.1086/501620
  24. Epps M.T., Langsdon S., Pels T.K. et al. Pocket irrigation and technique during reconstructive surgery: an American Society of Plastic Surgery survey of current practice. Ann Plast Surg 2019;82(6S Suppl 5):S427–S32. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001790
  25. Campbell C.A. The role of triple-antibiotic saline irrigation in breast implant surgery. Ann Plast Surg 2018;80(6S Suppl 6):S398–S402. doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000001345
  26. Adams W.P., Conner W.C., Barton F.E. Jr., Rohrich RJ. Optimizing breast pocket irrigation: an in vitro study and clinical implications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000;105(1):334–8; discussion 339–443. doi: 10.1097/00006534-200001000-00051
  27. Giordano S., Paltoniemi H., Lilus P., Salmi A. et al. Povidone-iodine combined with antibiotic topical irrigation to reduce capsular contracture in cosmetic breast augmentation: a comparative study. Aesthet Surg J 2013;33(5):675–80. doi: 10.1177/1090820X13491490
  28. Drinane J.J., Bergman R.S., Folkers B., Kortes M.J. Revisiting triple antibiotic irrigation of breast implant pockets: a placebo-controlled single practice cohort study. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2013;1(7):e55. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0b013e3182aa8760
  29. Blount A.L., Martin M.D., Lineberry K.D. et al. Capsular contracture rate in a low-risk population after primary augmentation mammaplasty. Aesthet Surg J 2013;33(4):516–21. doi: 10.1177/1090820X13484465
  30. Adams W.P. Jr., Rios J.L., Smith S.J. Enhancing patient outcomes in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery using triple antibiotic breast irrigation: six-year prospective clinical study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;117:30–6.
  31. Pfeiffer P., Jørgensen S., Kristiansen T.B. et al. Protective effect of topical antibiotics in breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124(2):629–34. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181addc68
  32. Olsen M.A., Nickel K.B., Fox I.K. Surveillance and prevention of surgical site infections in breast oncologic surgery with immediate reconstruction. Curr Treat Options Infect Dis 2017;9(2):155–72. doi: 10.1007/s40506-017-0117-9
  33. Khansa I., Hendrick R.G. Jr., Shore A. et al. Breast reconstruction with tissue expanders: implementation of a standardized best-practices protocol to reduce infection rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;134(1):11–8. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000261
  34. Glasberg S.B., Light D. AlloDerm and Strattice in breast reconstruction: a comparison and techniques for optimizing outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;129(6):1223–33. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824ec429
  35. Pittet B., Montandon D., Pittet D. et al. Infection in breast implants. Lancet Infect Dis 2005;5(2):94–106. doi: 10.1016/S1473-3099(05)01281-8
  36. Zhang H.L., Cheng Y., Wang X.J. Breast implant infections: clinical microbiology, early diagnosis, and antibiotic treatment. Biomed Environ Sci 2015;28(6):472–4. doi: 10.3967/BES2015.068
  37. Mesa F., Cataño S., Tuberquia O. Study of infections in breast augmentation surgery with implants in 9,691 patients over 5 years. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021;9(8):e3752. DOI: 10.1097/ GOX.0000000000003752
  38. O’Reilly E.B., Johnson M.D., Rohrich R.J. Comprehensive review of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: screening and preventive recommendations for plastic surgeons and other surgical health care providers. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014;134(5):1078–89. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000626
  39. Hu Y., Zhou X., Tong X. et al. Postoperative antibiotics and infection rates after implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Surg 2022;9:926936. DOI: 10.3389/ FSURG.2022.926936
  40. Bağhaki S., Soybir G.R., Soran A. Guideline for antimicrobial prophylaxis in breast surgery. J Breast Health 2014;10(2):79–82. doi: 10.5152/TJBH.2014.1959
  41. Anderson D.J., Podgorny K., Berríos-Torres S.I. et al. Strategies to prevent surgical site infections in acute care hospitals. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2014;35(6):605–27. doi: 10.1086/676022
  42. Яковлев С.В. Высокотехнологичная периоперационная иммунопрофилактика в контексте хирургической концепции Fast Track. Доктор.Ру. Анестезиология и реаниматология 2016;12(129):43–8.
  43. Yakovlev S.V. High-tech perioperative immunoprophylaxis in the context of the surgical concept of Fast Track. Doctor.Ru. Anesteziologiya i reanomatologiya = Doctor.ru. Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine 2016;12(129):43–8. (In Russ.).
  44. Duell C.H., OʼSullivan D.M., Bilinskaya A., Linder K.E. Evaluation of timing of antimicrobial surgical prophylaxis on rates of surgical site infections. Surg Infect (Larchmt) 2024;25(5):392–8. doi: 10.1089/sur.2024.010
  45. Jonge S.W., Boldingh Q.J., Koch A.H. Timing of preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis and surgical site infection: TAPAS, An Observational Cohort Study. Ann Surg 2021;274(4):e308–e14. DOI: 10.1097/ SLA.0000000000003634
  46. Avashia Y.J., Mohan R., Berhane C., Oeltjen J.C. Postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis for implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131(3):453–61. DOI: 10.1097/ PRS.0b013e31827c6d90
  47. Clayton J.L., Bazakas A., Lee C.N. et al. Once is not enough: withholding postoperative prophylactic antibiotics in prosthetic breast reconstruction is associated with an increased risk of infection. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012;130(3):495–502. DOI: 10.1097/ PRS.0b013e31825dbefe
  48. Wood A.M., Moss C., Keenan A. et al. Infection control hazards associated with the use of forced-air warming in operating theatres. J Hosp Infect 2014;88(3):132–40. doi: 10.1016/j.jhin.2014.07.010
  49. McGovern P.D., Albrecht M., Belani K.G. et al. Forced-air warming and ultra-clean ventilation do not mix: an investigation of theatre ventilation, patient warming and joint replacement infection in orthopaedics. J Bone Joint Surg Br 2011;93(11):1537–44. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B11.27124
  50. Partecke L.I., Goerdt A.M., Langner I. et al. Incidence of microperforation for surgical gloves depends on duration of wear. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 2009;30(5):409–14. doi: 10.1086/597062
  51. Jordan S.W., Mioton L.M., Smetona J. et al. Resident involvement and plastic surgery outcomes: an analysis of 10,356 patients from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131(4):763–73. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182818bdd
  52. Boyarov A.A., Tikhilov R.M., Shubnyakov I.I., Midaev A.I. Glove damage in total hip arthroplasty. Ortopediya, travmatologiya i vosstanovitelnaya khirurgiya detskogo vozrasta = Pediatric Traumatology, Orthopaedics and Reconstructive Surgery 2019;7(3):55–62. doi: 10.17816/PTORS7355-62
  53. Oliveira A.C., Gama C.S. Surgical antisepsis practices and use of surgical gloves as a potential risk factors to intraoperative contamination. Esc Anna Nery 2016;20(2):370–7. doi: 10.5935/1414-8145.20160051
  54. Lee K.T., Hong S.H., Jeon B.J. et al. Predictors for prolonged drainage following tissue expander–based breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019;144(1):9e–17e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005697
  55. Tokiyoshi T., Tsunashima C., Nomura T. et al. Factors preventing prolonged closed-suction drain placement after immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders. Kobe J Med Sci 2020;65(4):E132–E7.
  56. Backman M., Hassan-Nur M., Fridblom K. et al. OptiBra study, a randomized controlled trial on optimal postoperative bra support after breast cancer surgery. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2023;63:102285. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2023.102285

Supplementary files

Supplementary Files
Action
1. JATS XML
Download

Copyright (c) 2025 ABV-Press

License URL: https://mdonco.abvpress.ru/jour/about/editorialPolicies
СМИ зарегистрировано Федеральной службой по надзору в сфере связи, информационных технологий и массовых коммуникаций (Роскомнадзор).
Регистрационный номер и дата принятия решения о регистрации СМИ: серия ПИ № ФС 77-81466 от  03.08.2021.