TY - JOUR
T1 - The tissue-based triad in augmentation mastopexy
T2 - Single-stage technical refinements
AU - Sanniec, Kyle
AU - Adams, William P.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc.
Copyright:
Copyright 2019 Elsevier B.V., All rights reserved.
PY - 2019/11/13
Y1 - 2019/11/13
N2 - Background: The number of patients seeking augmentation mastopexy has increased over the last several decades. The conflicting goals of augmentation (tissue expansion) and mastopexy (tissue reduction) have led to higher revision rates, decreased patient satisfaction, and pending litigation. Some have even argued for staging of all augmentation mastopexy procedures. Objectives: The goal of this study was to review the senior author's (W.P.A.) process-oriented approach to single-stage augmentation mastopexy and to detail the technical framework to produce reliable, reproducible, safe results in a 1-stage augmentation mastopexy. Methods: A prospectively collected patient database from January 2007 until January 2018 was reviewed. All single-stage augmentation mastopexy patients were evaluated, including patient demographics, operative details, complications, and outcomes. Results: A total of 251 patients were evaluated. Mean follow-up was 16.9 months, average patient age was 38.0 years, and average implant size was 285.8 cc. A total of 9 (3.6%) patients required reoperation and only 2 (0.8%) required explantation. Fourteen (5.6%) patients developed delayed wound healing that responded to local wound care alone. Conclusions: Utilization of a safe and reliable processed approach to single-stage augmentation mastopexy is highly predictable with low reoperation rates. The technical refinements presented have led to increased consistency in delivering high-quality results to patients in a procedure fraught with challenges. Level of Evidence: 4:
AB - Background: The number of patients seeking augmentation mastopexy has increased over the last several decades. The conflicting goals of augmentation (tissue expansion) and mastopexy (tissue reduction) have led to higher revision rates, decreased patient satisfaction, and pending litigation. Some have even argued for staging of all augmentation mastopexy procedures. Objectives: The goal of this study was to review the senior author's (W.P.A.) process-oriented approach to single-stage augmentation mastopexy and to detail the technical framework to produce reliable, reproducible, safe results in a 1-stage augmentation mastopexy. Methods: A prospectively collected patient database from January 2007 until January 2018 was reviewed. All single-stage augmentation mastopexy patients were evaluated, including patient demographics, operative details, complications, and outcomes. Results: A total of 251 patients were evaluated. Mean follow-up was 16.9 months, average patient age was 38.0 years, and average implant size was 285.8 cc. A total of 9 (3.6%) patients required reoperation and only 2 (0.8%) required explantation. Fourteen (5.6%) patients developed delayed wound healing that responded to local wound care alone. Conclusions: Utilization of a safe and reliable processed approach to single-stage augmentation mastopexy is highly predictable with low reoperation rates. The technical refinements presented have led to increased consistency in delivering high-quality results to patients in a procedure fraught with challenges. Level of Evidence: 4:
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074961474&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074961474&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1093/asj/sjz006
DO - 10.1093/asj/sjz006
M3 - Review article
C2 - 30629099
AN - SCOPUS:85074961474
SN - 1090-820X
VL - 39
SP - 1331
EP - 1341
JO - Aesthetic Surgery Journal
JF - Aesthetic Surgery Journal
IS - 12
ER -