Hybrid Augmentation Mastopexy with New Generation of Smooth Surface Implants: Combining the Benefits of Fat Grafting, Inferior Muscle Support, and an L-Shaped Scar
- PMID: 36728268
- DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010196
Hybrid Augmentation Mastopexy with New Generation of Smooth Surface Implants: Combining the Benefits of Fat Grafting, Inferior Muscle Support, and an L-Shaped Scar
Abstract
Background: Augmentation mastopexy (AM) is a challenging procedure. Complications include implant displacement and visibility, which can be addressed, but the stability of the smooth implant surface and poor soft-tissue coverage may present limitations. This article describes a surgical technique for AM using a composite reverse inferior muscle sling associated with autogenous fat grafting.
Methods: Forty-five patients (90 breasts; mean age, 37.7 ± 7.2 years) underwent hybrid composite reverse inferior muscular sling AM. An upper/medial pole area between the implant and the clavicle region and parasternal area was marked to receive fat grafting and divided into three zones. Three-dimensional imaging was used to evaluate lower pole stretch and intermammary distance.
Results: The average implant volume was 265 cc (range, 175 to 335 cc). The average fat volumes in zones I/II and III were 80.1 (range, 61.6 to 95.2 cc) and 39.3 (range, 25.2 to 47.3 cc), respectively. Five complications were observed in three patients (6.6%)-minor dehiscence in two (4.4%) and nipple-areola asymmetry in one (2.2%). The lower pole stretched 11.51% (9.9 mm) and 9.8% (8.5 mm) on the right and left sides, respectively ( P < 0.0001), between 10 days and 1 year postoperatively. The intermammary distance was reduced, on average, 49.9% (25.1 mm) ( P < 0.001) between the preoperative value and 1 year postoperatively.
Conclusions: Hybrid composite reverse inferior muscular sling has led to improved aesthetic results for patients with breast ptosis and poor tissue coverage. Fat grafting and recognizing cleavage zones are still important to obtain satisfactory results. This procedure offers a good alternative for AM candidates, providing an adequate smooth surface for implant stabilization.
Copyright © 2023 by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons.
References
-
- Nahabedian MY. Breast deformities and mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127:91e–102e.
-
- Hidalgo DA, Spector JA. Mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:642e–656e.
-
- Sarosiek K, Maxwell GP, Unger JG. Getting the most out of augmentation-mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142:742e–759e.
-
- Spear SL, Dayan JH, Clemens MW. Augmentation mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg. 2009;36:105–115, vii; discussion 117.
-
- Beale EW, Ramanadham S, Harrison B, Rasko Y, Armijo B, Rohrich RJ. Achieving predictability in augmentation mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:284e–292e.
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
