Salvage of Infected Breast Implants

Background Implant-based breast reconstruction is being performed more frequently, and implants are associated with an increased risk of infection. We reviewed the clinical features of cases of implant infection and investigated the risk factors for breast device salvage failure.

Methods We retrospectively analyzed 771 patients who underwent implant-based breast reconstruction between January 2010 and December 2016. Age, body mass index, chemotherapy history, radiation exposure, and smoking history were assessed as potential risk factors for postoperative infection. We also evaluated the presence and onset of infection symptoms, wound culture pathogens, and other complications, including seroma, hematoma, and mastectomy skin necrosis. Additionally, we examined the mastectomy type, the use of acellular dermal matrix, the presence of an underlying disease such as hypertension or diabetes, and axillary node dissection.

Results The total infection rate was 4.99% (58 of 1,163 cases) and the total salvage rate was 58.6% (34 of 58). The postoperative duration to closed suction drain removal was significantly different between the cellulitis and implant removal groups. Staphylococcus aureus infection was most frequently found, with methicillin resistance in 37.5% of the cases of explantation. Explantation after infection was performed more often in patients who had undergone 2-stage expander/implant reconstruction than in those who had undergone direct-to-implant reconstruction.

Conclusions Preventing infection is essential in implant-based breast reconstruction. The high salvage rate argues against early implant removal. However, when infection is due to methicillin-resistant S. aureus and the patient’s clinical symptoms do not improve, surgeons should consider implant removal.

Keywords

Breast implants - Infection - Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus - Seroma

Publication History

Received: 13 June 2017

Accepted: 31 October 2017

Article published online:
20 April 2022

• REFERENCES

• 1 Weichman KE, Levine SM, Wilson SC. et al. Antibiotic selection for the treatment of infectious complications of implant-based breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2013; 71: 140-3
• 2 Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: part I. A prospective analysis of early complications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118: 825-31
• 3 Nahabedian MY. Acellular dermal matrices in primary breast reconstruction: principles, concepts, and indications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130(5 Suppl 2): 44S-53S
• 4 Francis SH, Ruberg RL, Stevenson KB. et al. Independent risk factors for infection in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124: 1790-6
• 5 Ranganathan K, Santosa KB, Lyons DA. et al. Use of acellular dermal matrix in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: are all acellular dermal matrices created equal?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136: 647-53
• 6 Pittman TA, Fan KL, Knapp A. et al. Comparison of different acellular dermal matrices in breast reconstruction: the 50/50 study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139: 521-8
• 7 Pinsolle V, Grinfeder C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S. et al. Complications analysis of 266 immediate breast reconstructions. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59: 1017-24
• 8 Snyderman RK. Breast augmentation. In: Snyderman RK. Symposium on Neoplastic and Reconstructive Problems of the Female Breast. St Louis: Mosby; 1973: 32-7
• 9 Southwick HW, Economou SG, Otten JW. Prosthetic replacement of chest-wall defects; an experimental and clinical study. AMA Arch Surg 1956; 72: 901-7
• 10 Spear SL, Seruya M. Management of the infected or exposed breast prosthesis: a single surgeon’s 15-year experience with 69 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125: 1074-84
• 11 Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris T, Momen B. et al. Infectious complications following breast reconstruction with expanders and implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112: 467-76