Background:Periareolar augmentation mastopexy is one of the most demanded operations at Plastic Surgery clinics. Nevertheless, it is one of the leads of malpractice claims in United States caused by the high patient expectations and the standard surgical techniques which may result in common complications. The aim of this report is to present a new surgical approach to solve these complications.Methods:After establishing a working hypothesis, we performed a revision study of our patients and we came to the following conclusion: in order to perform a periareolar mastopexy for ptosis correction, breast has to be tuberous at any level and to have abnormally short inferior pole. These findings may explain the main complications from periareolar augmentation mastopexy with the standard surgical techniques. Consequently, we started a prospective observational study including 56 patients following a new surgical technique which deals the cases as tuberous breasts.Results:During three years, fifty-six periareolar mastopexies were performed with this new surgical approach with one year follow-up. No major complications were observed and 40 of the patients (71%) described the results as very positive.Conclusion:“If a periareolar mastopexy can be performed, then it must be a tuberous breast”. According to this, a new surgical technique for periareolar augmentation mastopexy has been developed obtaining an improvement in our surgical results and achieving a totally different view on this pathology, which has not been reported in literature yet.
Human adipose tissue used to restore breast defects after oncologic resection did not increase metastasis development risk when there were residual breast cancer cells in proximity.
Background: The aim of this study was to develop an adipose tissue (AT) cryopreservation protocol that is effective, simple, and maintains the functionality and viability of AT after thawing and transplantation. Methods: Two cryopreservation temperatures (T°), −20°C and −80°C, and two cryoprotective agents (CPAs), trehalose and hydroxyethyl starch (HES), were compared first in an experimental study, using a slowfreezing protocol. The five experimental groups were the following: (a) Fresh AT (control group), (b) T = −20°C, 10%HES, (c) T = −80°C, 10%HES, (d) T = −20°C, 0.35M trehalose, (e) T = −80°C, 0.35M trehalose. We evaluated the morphology (histological studies) and tissue viability by glyceraldehyde 3-phosphate dehydrogenase (GAPDH) genic expression. Based on the results of the preliminary study, an in vivo study was performed, choosing as cryopreservation T° −20°C. HES and trehalose were compared as cryoprotective agents and with a control group (fresh AT). AT grafts were transplanted into immunodeficient mice. After 1 month of inoculation, animals were euthanized and samples were recovered. Samples were weighted and processed for histological study, viability study (GAPDH genic expression), and vascularization study (VEGF genic expression). Results: The initial histological study demonstrated that all AT cryopreserved group samples showed typical histological features of AT, similar to that of the control group. Statistically significant differences were not observed ( P > 0.05) in GAPDH expression between different groups related to temperature or CPA. Referring to the in vivo studies, cryopreserved groups showed good take of the graft and normal AT architectural preservation, as well as a clear vascular network. Statistically significant differences were not found ( P > 0.05) with regard to graft take (%), GAPDH, or VEGF expression. Conclusion: Slow freezing at −20°C using trehalose, and −20°C using HES as cryoprotective agents are both straightforward and easy AT cryopreservation procedures, with results similar to those of fresh AT in terms of tissue viability and morphohistological characteristics.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.