Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Senologie - Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und -therapie 2018; 15(02): 115-119
DOI: 10.1055/s-0043-111747
Wissenschaftliche Arbeit
Eigentümer und Copyright ©Georg Thieme Verlag KG 2017

Präpektorale Implantateinlage in der plastisch-rekonstruktiven Mammachirurgie – ein Diskussionsbeitrag

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Stefan Paepke
1   Breast Centre of the Technical University of Munich, Germany
,
Ralf Ohlinger
2   Breast Centre of the Ernst Moritz Arndt University of Greifswald, Germany
,
Evelyn Klein
1   Breast Centre of the Technical University of Munich, Germany
,
Marc Thill
3   Obstetrics and Gynaecology Clinic, Breast Centre, Agaplesion Markus Hospital, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
05 June 2018 (online)

Also available at
   Permissions and Reprints

Zusammenfassung

Die implantatbasierten Rekonstruktionstechniken nehmen in den letzten Jahren national und international kontinuierlich zu und decken ein weites Spektrum rekonstruktiver Anforderungen ab. Die nipple-sparende subkutane Mastektomie mit subpektoraler Implantat-Sofortrekonstruktion stellt das derzeitige Standardverfahren dar. Diese Operationstechnik erfordert jedoch den Einsatz heterologen Materials in Form von azellulären dermalen Matrices oder synthetischen Netzen, um eine optimale Implantatabdeckung, eine Stabilisierung des unteren Brustpols, die Stabilisierung des Implantats und die Fixierung des Muskels zu erreichen und somit ein optimales Ergebnis zu erzielen. Obwohl die subpektorale Implantateinlage hinsichtlich der Sicherheit und der Kosmetik sehr gute Ergebnisse zeigt, erfährt die präpektorale Implantateinlage derzeit eine Renaissance. Speziell für diese Rekonstruktionsmethode entwickelte Materialien [1] vereinfachen die Operationstechnik, und die durch die subpektorale Implantatposition hervorgerufenen Nebenwirkungen wie das „Jumping-Breast-Phänomen“, Schmerzen, Beeinträchtigungen der Schulterfunktion und Risiken wie Blutungen können verringert werden. So ergänzen die Möglichkeiten der präpektoralen Implantateinlage das Gesamtspektrum der rekonstruktiven Operationen; eine sorgfältige Indikationsstellung und die Analyse der Operationsergebnisse sind erforderlich, um eine Gesamtbeurteilung zu ermöglichen.

Schlüsselworter

implantatbasierte Brustrekonstruktion - Synthetische Netze - titanisierte Polypropylene-Netze TiLoop®Bra und Tiloop®Bra-Pocket - präpektorale Implantateinlage

Key words

implant-based breast reconstruction - synthetic meshes - titanised polypropylene mesh TiLoop®Bra and TiLoop®Bra-Pocket - prepectoral implant
 

  • References

  • 1 Cassella D, Calabrese C, Bianchi S. et al. Subcutaneous Tissue Expander Placement with Synthetic Titanium Coated Mesh in Breast Reconstruction: Long-term Results. PRSGlobalOpen 2015; DOI: 10.1097/GOX.000000000000000549.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic surgery statistics report. 2015 http://www.plasticsurgery.org./news/plastic-surgery-statistics ; Accessed: Nov13; 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Serdetti JM, Fosnot J, Nelson JA. et al. Breastreconstruction after breastcancer. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 124e-135e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Albernoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrars BJ. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131: 15-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Drabble EH, Osborne CLE, Wu E. Skin sparing mastectomy – how thorough can breast tissue removalbe?. Breast Canc Res Treatm 2006; (Suppl. 01) 121 abstr 2121
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Carlson GW, Bostwick JIII, Styblo T. et al. Skin sparing mastectomy: Oncologic and reconstructive considerations. Ann Surg 1997; 225: 570-575
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Gerber B, Krause A, Makovitzky J. et al. Skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) with conservation of the nipple-areola-complex (NAC) and autologous reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure. Breast Canc Res Treatm 2006; (Suppl. 01) 120 abstr 2116
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Paepke S, Schmid R, Paepke D. et al. Early results of nipple-areola-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy (NASSM) with complete resection of the retroareolar ductal system. Breast Canc Res Treatm 2005; 94 (01) 112 abstract 2081
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Paepke S, Schmid R, Fleckner S. et al. Subcutaneous mastectomy including conservation of the nipple areola complex: broadening the indications. Breast Canc Res Treatm 2006; (Suppl. 01) 122 abstr 2122
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Paepke S, Schmid R, Fleckner S. et al. Subcutaneous mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola-skin: broadening the indications. Ann Surg 2009; 250 (02) 288-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Rezai M, Strauß S, Kimmig R. et al. Risk-reducing, conservative mastectomy – analysis of surgical outcome and quality of life in 272 implant-based reconstructions using Tiloop®Bra versus autologous corial flaps. Gland Surg 2016; 5 (01) 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K. et al. Implant-based breast reconstruction using a titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP Bra): a multicenter study of 231 cases. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2013; 132 (01) 8e-19e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Dieterich M, Stubert J, Gerber B. et al. Biocompatibility, cell growth and clinical relevance of synthetic meshes and biological matrixes for internal support in implant-based breast reconstruction. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 291: 1371-1379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Derderian CA, Karp NS, Choi M. Wise pattern breast reconstruction: Modification using AlloDerm and a vascularized dermal-subcutaneous pedicle. Ann Plast Surg 2009; 62: 528-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Gamboa-Bobadilla GM. Implant breast reconstruction using acellulardermismatrix. Ann PlastSurg 2006; 56: 22-25
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Gschwantler-Kaulich D, Schrenk P, Bjelic-Radisic V. et al. Mesh versus acellular dermal matrix in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction – A prospective randomized trial. EJSO; 2016
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Salibian AH, Harness JK, Mowlds DS. Staged Suprapectoral Expander/Implant Reconstruction without Acellular Dermal Matrix following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; DOI: 10.1097/PRS.00000000000002845.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Sigalove S, Maxwell PG, Sigalove Noemi M. et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: Rationale, Indications, and Preliminary Results. Plast ReconstrSurg 2017; Vol 139) Number 2: 287-294
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Paepke S, Klein E, Krol J. et al. Subpectoral implants in oncoplastic-reconstructive breast surgery – habit or necessity? First experience with epipectoral implant positioning covered by acellular dermis and meshs. Jahrestagung der Association of British Breast Surgeons; 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Reitsamer R, Peintinger F. Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: a new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015; 68 (02) 162-167 . doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.10.012. Epub 2014 Oct 16. PMID: 25455288
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 Vidya R, Masia J, Cawthorn S. et al. Evaluation of the effectiveness of the prepectoral breast reconstruction with Braxon dermal matrix: First multicenter European report on 100 cases. The Breast Journal 2017; DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12810.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Becker H, Lind 2nd JG, Hopkins EG. Immediate Implant-based Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction Using a Vertical Incision. PlastReconstrSurg Glob Open 2015; 3 (06) e412 . doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000384. eCollection 2015 Jun. PMID: 26180713
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Paepke S. et al. Einsatz porciner azellulärer Dermis (Strattice™) als gewebeersetzendes und unterstützendes Interponat zur Implantatabdeckung bei problematischen Weichteilverhältnissen in der plastisch-rekonstruktiven Mammachirurgie. Senologie – Zeitschrift für Mammadiagnostik und -therapie; 2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 Paepke S, Riemann A, Dittmer S. et al. Patient-Reported-Outcome (PRO: Vergleichsuntersuchungen bei Patientinnen mit implantatbasierten materialunterstützten Mammaoperationen. Jahrestagung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Senologie; 2016: PO73
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Paepke S, Kiechle M, Ankel C. et al. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in implant-based mesh-supported breast reconstruction – eraly results of a multicentre prospective trial. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Senologie; 2015
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Cassella D, Calabrese C, Bianchi S. et al. Subcutaneous tissue expander placement with synthetic titanium-coated mesh in breast reconstruction: longterm results. PRS GlobalOpen. 2015; DOI: 10.1097/GOX/.00000000000000549.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Casella D, Bernini M, Bencini L. et al. TiLoop® Bra mesh used for immediate breast reconstruction: comparison of retropectoral and subcutaneous implant placement in a prospective single-institution series. Eur J Plast Surg 2014; 37 (11) 599-604 Epub 2014 Aug 3. PMID: 25339795
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Sbitany H, Piper M, Lentz R. Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Safe Alternative ToSubmuscularProstheticReconstruction Following Nipple Sparing Mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003627. . PMID:28574
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Salibian AH, Harness JK, Mowlds DS. Staged Suprapectoral Expander/Implant Reconstruction without Acellular Dermal Matrix following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139 (01) 30-39 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002845. PMID: 28027223
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Caputo GG, Marchetti A, DallaPozza E. et al. Skin-Reduction Breast Reconstructions with Prepectoral Implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (06) 1702-1705 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002227. PMID: 27219226
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Casella D, Calabrese C, Bianchi S. et al. Subcutaneous Tissue Expander Placement with Synthetic Titanium-Coated Mesh in Breast Reconstruction: Long-term Results. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 3 (12) e577 . doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000549. eCollection 2015 Dec. PMID: 26894002
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Bernini M, Calabrese C, Cecconi L. et al. Subcutaneous Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction: Surgical, Functional, and Aesthetic Results after Long-Term Follow-Up. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2016; 3 (12) e574 . doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000000533. eCollection 2015 Dec. PMID: 26893999
    PubMedGoogle Scholar