Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss
Ibrahiem, S. (2024). Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss. EKB Journal Management System, 48(2), 129-137. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.352134
Saad Mohamed Saad Ibrahiem. "Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss". EKB Journal Management System, 48, 2, 2024, 129-137. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.352134
Ibrahiem, S. (2024). 'Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss', EKB Journal Management System, 48(2), pp. 129-137. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.352134
Ibrahiem, S. Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss. EKB Journal Management System, 2024; 48(2): 129-137. doi: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.352134

Useful Guide to Subpectoral Augmentation Mastopexy after Massive Weight Loss

The Egyptian Journal of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Article 7, Volume 48, Issue 2, April 2024, Page 129-137  XML PDF (759.93 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/ejprs.2024.352134
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Author
Saad Mohamed Saad Ibrahiem email orcid
The Department of Plastic Surgery, Reconstructive Surgery and Burn Management, Faculty of Medicine, Alexandria University
Abstract
Background: The extent of breast ptosis and deformity
after massive weight loss is severe and the treatment of this
problem is challenging. Recently, there has been a great deal of
interest and several studies on augmentation mastopexy in this
unique patient population due to the large number of patients
who present after bariatric surgery.
Objective: This study aims to describe a useful guide for a
single-stage augmentation mastopexy that combines the benefits
of the submuscular plane with a superior dermoglandular
flap for massive weight loss patients (MWLP) with grade 3
breast ptosis.
Methods: A retrospective cohort included 54 MWLP with
grade 3 breast ptosis (nipple below the inframammary fold and
lowest part of the breast) who underwent single-stage augmentation
mastopexy between January 2016 and December 2020.
Results: The mean age of the patients was 32.4 years
(range: 20 to 50 years), the mean current BMI was 26.6kg/m2,
and the mean follow-up time was 22 months (range: 13 to 56
months).
The patients reported outcome of the BREAST -Q scales
were as follows: Physical well-being (89.3), sexual well-being
(88.6), and psychosocial well-being (89.3).
The overall incidence of complications was of 18.52%.
Mild wound healing problems in 6 patients. Reoperation in 4
cases (7.4%) due to implant malposition within 6 months postoperatively.
Conclusion: The study results showed that single stage
augmentation mastopexy should be limited to patients with
good breast symmetry and patients who desire rational volume
augmentation.
Supplementary Files
References
Calobrace M.B. and Gabriel A.: Mastopexy with Autoaugmentation
and Fat Transfer. Clin Plast Surg., 48 (1): 17-32.
doi:10.1016/j.cps.2020.09.008, 2021.
2- Constantine R.S., Davis K.E. and Kenkel J.M.: The effect
of massive weight loss status, amount of weight
loss, and method of weight loss on body contouring
outcomes. Aesthet Surg. J., 34 (4): 578-583.
doi:10.1177/1090820X14528208, 2014.
3- Beidas O.E. and Rubin J.P.: Breast Reshaping After
Massive Weight Loss. Clin. Plast. Surg., 46 (1): 71-76.
doi:10.1016/j.cps.2018.08.009, 2019.
4- Lang Stümpfle R., Piccinini P.S., Pereira-Lima L.F. and
Valiati A.A.: Muscle-Splitting Augmentation-Mastopexy:
Implant Protection With an Inferior Dermoglandular
Flap. Ann. Plast. Surg., 82 (2): 137-144. doi:10.1097/
SAP.0000000000001689, 2019.
5- Regnault P.: Breast ptosis. Definition and treatment. Clin.
Plast. Surg., 3 (2): 193-203, 1976.
6- Ramirez O.M.: Reduction mammaplasty with the “owl”
incision and no undermining. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.,
109 (2): 512–524. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006534-
200202000-00016, 2002.
7- Hall-Findlay E.J.: Vertical breast reduction. Semin Plast.
Surg., 18 (3): 211-224. doi:10.1055/s-2004-831908, 2004.
8- Rubin J.P., Gusenoff J.A. and Coon D.: Dermal suspension
and parenchymal reshaping mastopexy after massive
weight loss: statistical analysis with concomitant procedures
from a prospective registry. Plast. Reconstr. Surg.,
123 (3): 782-789. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e31819ba1a8,
2009.
9- Nghiem B.T., Koenig W. and Amalfi A.N.: Augmentation
Mastopexy: Challenging Dogma to Produce Long-
Term Aesthetic Results. Advances in Cosmetic Surgery,
(4): 161-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yacs.2021.02.005,
2021.
10- Nava M., Rancati A., Rocco N., Catanuto G. and Irigo
M.: Improving aesthetic outcomes in mastopexy with the
“autoprosthesis” technique. Gland Surg., 6 (2): 141-147.
doi:10.21037/gs.2017.03.05, 2017.
11- Kirwan L., Wazir U. and Mokbel K.: Breast Auto-Augmentation:
A Versatile Method of Breast Rehabilitation-A
Retrospective Series of 107 Procedures. Arch. Plast. Surg.,
42 (4): 438-445. doi:10.5999/aps.2015.42.4.438, 2015.
12- Beale E.W., Ramanadham S., Harrison B., Rasko Y.,
Armijo B. and Rohrich R.J.: Achieving predictability in
augmentation mastopexy. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 133 (3):
284e-292e. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000000079, 2014.
Egypt, J. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., April 2024 137
13- Lee J.H., Jang J.H. and Min K.H.: A Comparison of
Smooth and Microtextured Breast Implants in Breast
Augmentation: A Retrospective Study. Arch. Plast.
Surg., 50 (2): 160-165. Published 2023 Mar, 28.
doi:10.1055/s-0042-1760405, 2023.
13- Coombs D.M., Srivastava U., Amar D., Rubin J.P. and
Gusenoff J.A.: The Challenges of Augmentation Mastopexy
in the Massive Weight Loss Patient: Technical
Considerations. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 139 (5): 1090-
1099. doi:10.1097/PRS.0000000000003294, 2017.
14- Stevens W.G., Macias L.H., Spring M., Stoker D.A.,
Chacón C.O. and Eberlin S.A.: One-Stage Augmentation
Mastopexy: A Review of 1192 Simultaneous Breast
Augmentation and Mastopexy Procedures in 615 Consecutive
Patients. Aesthet. Surg. J., 34 (5): 723-732.
doi:10.1177/1090820X14531434, 2014.
15- Artz J.D., Tessler O., Clark S., Patel S., Torabi R. and
Moses M.: Can It Be Safe and Aesthetic? An Eight-year
Retrospective Review of Mastopexy with Concurrent
Breast Augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open.,
7 (6): e2272. Published 2019 Jun. 12. doi:10.1097/
GOX.0000000000002272, 2019.
16- Lee M.R., Unger J.G. and Adams W.P. Jr.: The tissue-based
triad: A process approach to augmentation mastopexy.
Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 134 (2): 215-225. doi:10.1097/
PRS.0000000000000387, 2014.
17- Xue A.S., Dayan E. and Rohrich R.J.: Achieving Predictability
in Augmentation Mastopexy: An Update. Plast
Reconstr Surg. Glob Open., 8 (9): e2784. Published 2020
Sep. 21. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000002784, 2020.
18- Swanson E.: All Seasons Vertical Augmentation Mastopexy:
A Simple Algorithm, Clinical Experience, and
Patient-reported Outcomes. Plast. Reconstr. Surg. Glob.
Open., 4 (12): e1170. Published 2016 Dec. 27. doi:10.1097/
GOX.0000000000001170, 2016.
19- Cunningham B.: The Mentor Core Study on Silicone MemoryGel
Breast Implants. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 120 (7 Suppl
1): 19S-29S. doi:10.1097/01.prs.0000286574.88752.04,
2007.
20- Codner M.A., Mejia J.D., Locke M.B., et al.: A 15-year experience
with primary breast augmentation. Plast. Reconstr.
Surg., 127 (3): 1300-1310. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e-
318205f41b, 2011.
21- Calobrace M.B., Herdt D.R. and Cothron K.J.: Simultaneous
augmentation/mastopexy: A retrospective 5-year review
of 332 consecutive cases. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 131
(1): 145-156. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e318272bf86, 2013.
22- Spear S.L., Dayan J.H. and Clemens M.W.: Augmentation
mastopexy. Clin. Plast. Surg., 36 (1): 105-117.
doi:10.1016/j.cps.2008.08.006, 2

Statistics
Article View: 44
PDF Download: 48