No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
Abdominoplasty and Breast Augmentation via Single Incision
Abstract
Abdominoplasty is a procedure that is increasingly requested in conjunction with other aesthetic procedures. The combination of abdominoplasty and breast surgery has been the most frequently performed combined procedures in aesthetic surgery as these body areas are often subject to the most significant alterations following pregnancy, nursing and weight alterations.The surgery for Abdominoplasty and Breast Augmentation via Single Incision begins with conventional abdominoplasty flap dissection. Umbilicus is freed. Dissection ends up at arcus costarium. A 4 cm wide opening is created with electrocautery to pass through the inframmamary fold. A subpectoral pocket is created. After adequate pocket creation, the implant is placed. After breast augmentation completed, procedure goes on with conventional abdominoplasty. Finally, the lower abdominal skin is closed in layers using absorbable barbed sutures while umbilicus inset is completed. Final adjustment can be made with liposuction cannulas.It is well reported that tummy and breast contouring surgeries increase the self-esteem, the quality of life, and self-image.Abdominoplasty and breast augmentation via single incision is a satisfactory option for mommy makeover. This combination has numerous advantages. This is preferred in the pursuit of minimizing incisions and maximizing aesthetic results in one single procedure. Transabdominal breast augmentation is a safe, reliable procedure in the appropriately selected patients. It can be used in grade 1 and some of the grade 2 breast ptotic patients who request concurrent breast augmentation and abdominoplasty.KeywordsMommy makeoverBreastAugmentationBellyAbdomenTABATransabdominalBreast augmentationPregnancyPostpartumAbdominoplastyImplantSingle incision
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Background:
Abdominoplasty patients are frequently candidates for breast rejuvenation as well. Transabdominal breast augmentation permits insertion of breast implants through the abdominoplasty incision. This combined procedure is preferentially performed in an outpatient setting under monitored anesthesia care and nerve blocks.
Methods:
This study was a 14-year retrospective review of a single surgeon's technique and outcomes using transabdominal breast augmentation through a low transverse abdominoplasty incision in select patients requesting simultaneous abdominoplasty and bilateral breast augmentation. Patients had minimal ptosis, smoking cessation a minimum of 4 weeks before surgery and indefinitely thereafter, and a lack of superior abdominal or significant breast surgery.
Results:
The study's 114 patients had a mean follow-up of 19.2 months. The procedure was performed under monitored anesthesia care with intercostal nerve blocks for most patients [n = 107 (93.9 percent)] and general anesthesia [n = 7 (6.1 percent)] for a few. Seventy-nine patients [n = 74 (64.9 percent)] underwent additional procedures, with most (n = 48) undergoing suction-assisted lipectomy. Many patients underwent multiple procedures. Most complications occurred predictably along the central distal abdominoplasty flap and were minor (small wound breakdown, seroma, and mild skin infection). Major complications [n = 8 (7.0 percent)] included two patients with implant malposition requiring revision and one patient with a Baker grade III capsule; notably, this patient was a half-pack-per-day smoker with a body mass index of 27 kg/m.
Conclusions:
Transabdominal breast augmentation is a safe, reliable procedure in the appropriately selected, healthy patient and may be used in minimally to moderately ptotic patients who request concurrent breast augmentation and abdominoplasty. Morbidity compares favorably to reported abdominoplasty series in the appropriately selected patient.
Clinical question/level of evidence:
Therapeutic, IV.
Combined abdominal and breast surgery presents a convenient and relatively cost-effective approach for accomplishing both procedures.
This study is the largest to date assessing the safety of combined procedures, and it aims to develop a simple pretreatment risk stratification method for patients who desire a combined procedure.
All women undergoing abdominoplasty, panniculectomy, augmentation mammaplasty, and/or mastopexy in the TOPS database were identified. Demographics and outcomes for combined procedures were compared to individual procedures using χ(2) and Student's t-tests. Multiple logistic regression provided adjusted odds ratios for the effect of a combined procedure on 30-day complications. Among combined procedures, a logistic regression model determined point values for pretreatment risk factors including diabetes (1 point), age over 53 (1), obesity (2), and 3+ ASA status (3), creating a 7-point pretreatment risk stratification tool.
A total of 58,756 cases met inclusion criteria. Complication rates among combined procedures (9.40%) were greater than those of aesthetic breast surgery (2.66%; P < .001) but did not significantly differ from abdominal procedures (9.75%; P = .530). Nearly 77% of combined cases were classified as low-risk (0 points total) with a 9.78% complication rates. Medium-risk patients (1 to 3 points) had a 16.63% complication rate, and high-risk (4 to 7 points) 38.46%.
Combining abdominal and breast procedures is safe in the majority of patients and does not increase 30-day complications rates. The risk stratification tool can continue to ensure favorable outcomes for patients who may desire a combined surgery.
4 Risk.
© 2015 The American Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, Inc. Reprints and permission: journals.permissions@oup.com.
Background:
Capsular contracture is a complication of breast augmentation that frequently requires revision surgery. "Capsulectomy, site change, and implant exchange" has been referred to as the gold standard treatment of clinically significant contractures. However, the actual clinical evidence behind this algorithm remains elusive at best. A systematic review of the literature was performed to clarify the true evidence behind the surgical management of capsular contracture.
Methods:
A search of the MEDLINE database was performed for clinical studies involving the surgical treatment of capsular contracture following breast augmentation. Resulting articles were reviewed using a priori criteria.
Results:
The systematic review was performed in April of 2015. The primary search for "breast augmentation" yielded 9490 articles. When filtered for "treatment of capsular contracture," 461 articles resulted. Review of these articles and pertinent references using a priori criteria yielded 24 final articles. No controlled trials met final inclusion criteria.
Conclusions:
There is limited clinical evidence behind the surgical management of capsular contracture. Site change and implant exchange are associated with reduced contracture recurrence rates and likely play a beneficial role in treating capsular contracture. The data on capsulectomy are less conclusive. Acellular dermal matrix may be a useful adjunct but still requires long-term data.
An abstract is unavailable. This article is available as HTML full text and PDF.
Over the last five years, there has been a groundswell of interest in the prevention of venous thromboembolism (VTE). An increased level of understanding of the disease process coupled with data documenting the alarmingly high incidence of VTE has prompted a global awareness of the disease. Consequently, prevention of VTE has been targeted by hospitals, both in the United States and abroad, as a top priority to improve patient care. VTE refers to a continuum of disease that begins with deep venous thrombosis (DVT) and can progress to pulmonary embolism (PE). DVT is the more common form of VTE and is often silent, with only 33% of patients presenting with symptoms. As a result, VTE often goes undetected and, if allowed, can progress to PE. This typically delays treatment and results in high rates of morbidity and mortality. The combination of VTE being both difficult to detect and deadly if untreated makes it a disease that is best addressed with preventive rather than therapeutic measures.
Combined cosmetic procedures have become increasingly popular. One of the most common combinations of cosmetic procedures includes abdominoplasty and cosmetic breast surgery. The shortened recovery and financial savings associated with combined surgery contribute to the increased demand for these combined surgeries.
The goal of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of combined abdominoplasty and breast surgery at a single plastic surgery practice that performs a large volume of these cases. This is an update to a study published in 2006.
A retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent combined abdominoplasty and cosmetic breast surgery during the last 10 years at a single outpatient surgery center. Abdominoplasty inclusion criteria were defined as lower, mini, full, reverse, or circumferential abdominoplasty. Cosmetic breast surgery inclusion criteria were defined as augmentation, mastopexy, augmentation-mastopexy, reduction, or removal and replacement of implants. Pertinent preoperative and intraoperative data were recorded along with complications and revisions.
There were 268 patients during the 10-year period between 1997 and 2007. There were no cases of death, pulmonary embolism, deep venous thrombosis, or other life-threatening complications. The overall complication rate was 34%. Abdominoplasty seroma and scars requiring revision comprised 68% (n = 74) of the complications. The total revision rate was 13%.
Combined abdominoplasty and cosmetic breast surgery was safe and effective in this large series of cases performed at a single plastic surgery practice. The complication and revision rates of the combined surgery were similar to those reported for individually staged procedures.
Breast augmentation with silicone prosthesis through a dermolipectomy approach, its advantages (geometric preoperative planning, abdominal reduction in all three dimensions, providing an improved waistline and a navel of normal aspect, short bikini covered scar of good quality, breast augmentation without regional scars), and limitations (exclusive of major abdominal adiposites and moderately or severely ptotic, hypoplastic breasts) are discussed, and the technique is described. The results obtained with the procedure are considered satisfactory for both patient and surgeon, and are recommended for cases of abdominal adiposity combined with unilateral or bilateral breast hypoplasias.
We present our technique of doing an abdominal lipectomy and augmentation mammaplasty in the same operation, through the same incision, in selected patients. We introduce the breast implants through tunnels made from the top of the abdominal pocket into the breast areas. We have had no complications in 12 patients in whom we have done this operation.
Simultaneous breast augmentation and abdominoplasty through a transverse suprapubic incision offers women the opportunity to undergo body restoration with one operation, one anestheitc, one incision, and no scars on or near the breasts. Prompted by the earlier work of Planas [5] and others, we have performed this combined procedure on 8 women since February, 1977, and have compared the results with those in 4 additional patients who underwent separate abdominoplasty and breast augmentation operations.
Candidates for abdominoplasty often request multiple procedures at the time of consultation. Some of these patients have the potential opportunity to have ancillary procedures performed through the abdominoplasty incision, such as breast augmentation or suction-assisted lipectomy. Access via the abdominoplasty incision can also limit the need for distant donor sites, for instance, when autologous fillers or rib graft are necessary. The techniques described are straightforward and are based on standard principles that should be considered when ancillary procedures are performed in conjunction with abdominal contouring procedures. In a review of 70 consecutive patients undergoing abdominoplasty, 91 ancillary procedures were performed in conjunction with the abdominoplasty. Of the total number of patients undergoing abdominoplasty, 29 patients underwent 30 procedures facilitated through their abdominoplasty incision, including 23 suction-assisted lipectomies of the flanks, six breast augmentations, and one rib cartilage harvesting for rhinoplasty. A review of the author's experience and discussion for potential options afforded by this exposure are presented.
The number of abdominoplasties performed in the United States has been steadily increasing over the past decade. A large proportion of these patients are bariatric patients who remain obese despite prior weight-reduction surgery. This study was done to review the experience of patients undergoing abdominoplasty at a university hospital. A retrospective chart review of 206 consecutive patients was performed. The overall complication rate was 37.4%. Major complications [hematoma requiring surgical intervention, seroma requiring aspiration or surgical drainage, cellulitis or abscess requiring hospitalization and intravenous (IV) antibiotics, deep vein thrombosis (DVT), and pulmonary embolism (PE)] occurred in 16% of patients. The rate of minor complications (hematoma or seroma requiring no intervention, epidermolysis, small-wound dehiscence, neuropathic pain, and minor cellulitis) was 26.7%. Obese patients had a significantly increased risk of developing major complications as compared with nonobese patients (53.4% versus 28.8%, P = 0.001). An in-depth analysis of all complications and risk factors was done.
Abdominoplasty and breast augmentation are often performed together, and subglandular augmentation through the abdominoplasty incision has been previously described. Nine cases of subpectoral breast augmentation and abdominoplasty performed through a single low transverse abdominal incision were performed between 2002 and 2005. The selection criteria included women who were healthy, nonsmokers, without true breast ptosis or breast deformity requiring additional shaping. The subpectoral space was accessed and the pectoralis major origins were mobilized under direct vision, and the implant pocket was shaped with the aid of a breast sizer and breast dissector. The mean follow-up was 22 months. The surgical goals were realized in all cases, with no asymmetry or implant-related complications. The standard abdominoplasty incision provides ample exposure for the creation of a subpectoral pocket and precise placement of implants. The procedure should be considered in patients who wish abdominal recontouring and breast augmentation and have minimal ptosis.
Abdominoplasty assessed by survey, with emphasis on complications
- F M Grazer
- R M Goldwyn