Surgical Principles and Imaging of Breast Implants and Their Follow-Up

2014 ◽  
pp. 449-464
Author(s):  
Luca Dessy ◽  
Nefer Fallico ◽  
Gloria Fanelli ◽  
Carlo De Masi ◽  
Luca Saba ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Author(s):  
Antonio Carlos Pinto Oliveira ◽  
Marcelo Maino ◽  
Eduardo Madalosso Zanin ◽  
Lucio de Carli ◽  
Daniele Walter Duarte ◽  
...  

BMJ ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 343 (sep06 4) ◽  
pp. d5664-d5664 ◽  
Author(s):  
N. Stafford
Keyword(s):  

1997 ◽  
Vol 99 (5) ◽  
pp. 1346-1353 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dennis M. Deapen ◽  
Leslie Bernstein ◽  
Garry S. Brody
Keyword(s):  

2021 ◽  
Vol 147 (3) ◽  
pp. 556-566 ◽  
Author(s):  
David A. Caplin ◽  
M. Bradley Calobrace ◽  
Roger N. Wixtrom ◽  
Megan M. Estes ◽  
John W. Canady

Author(s):  
Jessy Hansen ◽  
Susannah Ahern ◽  
Pragya Gartoulla ◽  
Ying Khu ◽  
Elisabeth Elder ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) are an important tool for evaluating outcomes following breast device procedures, and are used by breast device registries. PROMs can assist with device monitoring through benchmarked outcomes, but need to account for demographic and clinical factors which may affect PROMs responses. Objectives This study aimed to develop appropriate risk-adjustment models for the benchmarking of PROMs data to accurately track device outcomes and identify outliers in an equitable manner. Methods Data for this study were obtained from the Australian Breast Device Registry, which consists of a large prospective cohort of patients with primary breast implants. The five-question BREAST-Q implant surveillance module was used to assess PROMs at one-year following implant insertion. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate associations between demographic and clinical characteristics and PROMs separately by implant indication. Final multivariate risk-adjustment models were built sequentially assessing the independent significant association of these variables. Results 2,221 reconstructive and 12,045 aesthetic primary breast implants with complete one-year follow-up PROMs were included in the study. Indication for operation (post-cancer, risk-reduction, developmental deformity) was included in the final model for all reconstructive implant PROMs. Site type (private or public hospital) was included in the final breast reconstruction model for look, rippling and tightness. Age at operation was included in the reconstruction models for rippling and tightness and in the aesthetic models for look, rippling, pain and tightness. Conclusions These multivariate models will be useful for equitable benchmarking of breast devices by PROMs to help track device performance.


1994 ◽  
Vol 32 (6) ◽  
pp. 580-587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jane A. Petro ◽  
Susan A. Klein ◽  
Zahid Niazi ◽  
C. Andrew Salzberg ◽  
Daniel Byrne
Keyword(s):  

1995 ◽  
Vol 3 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
John Michael Drever

Dermis fat grafts for body contouring have been used for over a century and extensively reported and researched, but since the advent of the more reliable silicone implants they have been dropped and neglected. As a consequence of the present controversy surrounding silicone breast implants, women are inquiring about augmentation with their own tissues. Healthy patients with good vascularity are the best candidates. These grafts are removed from the lower abdomen and placed with the dermis side facing the muscle, ‘take’ and then lose about 30 to 50% of their initial volume. Thirty-six cases were performed with this technique, and a two-and-a-half year follow-up with few complications and a high level of satisfaction is reported.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document