Management of Implant Exposure and Extrusion

Anophthalmia ◽  
2019 ◽  
pp. 159-171
Author(s):  
Benjamin Erickson
Keyword(s):  
2015 ◽  
Vol 38 (5) ◽  
pp. 427-428
Author(s):  
Guido Torresini ◽  
Antonella Sozio ◽  
Emanuele Garreffa ◽  
Maurizio Brucchi ◽  
Riccardo Lucantoni

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (6) ◽  
pp. 896-900 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Antonio De Riggi ◽  
Nicola Rocco ◽  
Giulio Gherardini ◽  
Emanuela Esposito ◽  
Massimiliano D’Aiuto

2020 ◽  
Vol 68 (6) ◽  
pp. 1228
Author(s):  
Roshmi Gupta ◽  
Parvathi Hari ◽  
Bhawna Khurana ◽  
Anjali Kiran

Author(s):  

Introduction After mastectomies, we do our reconstruction, either immediately or delayed. In both ways of reconstruction for post mastectomies defect, the most commonly performed reconstruction is by using breast prosthesis [1]. For many years, surgeons have been trying to find out any solution to reduce the rate of implant exposure and develop some new techniques and modifications. However, once the infection develops or implant expose the only permanent solution is to remove the implant [2-3]. Although there is less evidence found in the literature regarding the salvage of implant once the infection occurs and when implant becomes expose in implant-based reconstruction [4]. Radiation also plays additional role in post-operative complication rates following implant-based breast reconstruction, as it is well documented that the incidence of complications is to be higher in radiated breasts compare to similar non-radiated breasts [5]. With the new advancement in radiation therapy the number of patients have been increasing who are receiving radiation therapy after immediate breast reconstruction [5]. Description of the Technique For more than 15 years we have been reconstructing the breasts deformities after different types of mastectomies, ranging from skin sparing, nipple areola sparing to different types of lumpectomies, by immediate insertion of breast implants. The main problem which we face during post-reconstruction, is the exposure of implant in addition to infection. With the advent of ADM (Artificial Dermal Matrix) [6], serratus anterior muscle [7], rectus fascial flap [7] and inferior dermal flaps [8] although they do an addition to thickness of skin envelop over the implant after mastectomy, but still the rate of implant exposure has not changed noticeably. It has been well understood that of ADM expose in air it dries immediately which later on results in implant exposure. Meanwhile we have developed a novel tech- nique to augment the soft tissue coverage under the incision line over the ADM and implant. By this way, if there is any dehiscence over suture line, there will be no implant exposure as there is additional soft tissue layer of dermal flap. These dermal flaps are actually a de-epithelialized dermal flap from the inferior half of the breast skin, which we used to excise and throw it to the garbage, particularly in skin sparing mastectomies. In this technique we suture the inferior based dermal flap over the artificial dermal matrix in a way that suture lines of skin flaps of mastectomy lie over the de-epithelialized dermal flap, which actually in- crease the survivability of ADM as well as increase the thickness of soft tissue over the implant (figure 1 and 2). By addition of this layer of de-epithelialized dermal flaps over the artificial dermal matrix and breast implants have promising reduction effect over implant exposure as well as it provides the additional vascularized soft tissue layer over the implant. Although we are using dermal flap with ADM frequently in most of our skin spring mastectomies but we did this new technique in 2 patients till now with the mean follow up of 8 weeks till now there is not a single case report of implant exposure in those patients (figure 3).


2020 ◽  
Vol 11 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-240
Author(s):  
Anupam Singh ◽  
M Vathulya ◽  
Ajai Agrawal ◽  
Rupal Verma ◽  
S. K. Mittal ◽  
...  

Background: Evisceration and nucleation are commonly performed ophthalmic surgeries for painful blind eye, disfiguring blind eye, endophthalmitis etc. After both these surgeries it is important to replace the lost volume in the orbit with implant. Implant is associated with many complications such as major discharge, exposure with discharge and implant exposure. The main surgical management of implant exposures basically primary revision or patch grafting with or without removal of the implant. Case: A 60 years old man presented to ophthalmic OPD with complaint of foreign body sensation and irritation in left eye. There was history of evisceration with silicon ball implant in left eye done one month back for painful blind eye at another hospital. On ophthalmic examination, there was a 3 × 4 mm of implant exposure most probably dueto tight closure. As per records the size of implant was 22mm. The patient was planned for extra-ocular myoplasty with buccal mucosal graft under general anesthesia. Observation: After sterile prepping and draping, 360˚ degrees peritomy was performed and care was taken to dissect between tenons and orbital implant. Medialand lateral recti were isolated and dissected upto 10-12mm from insertion site. Both the recti were secured with 6-0 vicryl suture and were detached from their respective insertions, advanced and approximated over the site of implant exposure. Thus the exposed implant was covered with a vascularized base which was reinforced with amucosal graft harvested from the buccal mucosa and secured with absorbable sutures. After 1 year of follow up patient was asymptomatic. Conclusion: Extraocular myoplasty with buccal mucosal graft is a good surgical remedy for orbital implant exposure implant.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document