Skip to main content
Hauptrubriken
CME Facharzt-Training Webinare Zeitschriften Bücher e.Medpedia Podcast
Service
Jobbörse Info & Hilfe
Fachgebiete
Anästhesiologie Allgemeinmedizin Arbeitsmedizin Augenheilkunde Chirurgie Dermatologie Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe HNO Innere Medizin Kardiologie Neurologie Onkologie und Hämatologie Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie Pädiatrie Pathologie Psychiatrie Radiologie Rechtsmedizin Urologie Zahnmedizin
Themen
Klimawandel und Gesundheit Neues aus dem Markt COVID-19 Praxis und Beruf Seltene Erkrankungen GOÄ & EBM Panorama
Sammlungen
Kasuistiken Algorithmen & Infografiken Blickdiagnosen Arthropedia FlapFinder (für Dermatochirurgen) Videos Kongressberichterstattung Medizin für Apothekerinnen und Apotheker Für Ärztinnen und Ärzte in Weiterbildung Für Medizinstudierende
Erweiterte Suche
Anmelden
nach oben
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery
Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2020

07.10.2019 | Review

Types of Errors Made During Breast Augmentation with Polyurethane Implants: A Systematic Review

verfasst von: D. Batiukov, V. Podgaiski, D. Ladutko

Erschienen in: Aesthetic Plastic Surgery | Ausgabe 1/2020

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Background

Implementation of polyurethane-covered (PU) implants into practice requires a reassessment of the experience and a learning curve period. Occasional publications describe a few difficulties in this regard. However, there are no publications covering the spectrum of errors. The absence of definite information and contradictory findings makes the learning curve longer leading to many unsatisfactory results.

Materials and Methods

The systematization is based on the 12 years of experience with over 1000 patients and previously published data. A literature review was conducted using PUBMED with the following keywords: polyurethane or foam or sponge and breast and implant. A total of 285 articles were found (last accessed 08/13/2019). All articles concerning polyurethane implants were studied along with any articles found describing the surgical techniques applied to them. Additional references found in the above-mentioned articles were also included in the study.

Results

All errors can be divided into planning errors, errors in pocket development and surface-dependent errors, for which the polyurethane surface is the main reason. Surface-dependent errors include the errors connected to positioning and biointegration. The possible causes of late seroma with PU implants are discussed.

Conclusions

The polyurethane surface should not be considered textured in the clinical point of view. Previous experience with non-PU implants cannot be transferred to PU implants. The learning curve is unavoidable. The systematization of errors with PU implants facilitates a decision-making process during the primary and secondary surgery and lowers the risk of the unsatisfactory results.

Level of Evidence IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine Ratings, please refer to Table of Contents or online Instructions to Authors www.​springer.​com/​00266.
Anhänge
Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich
Literatur
1.
2.
3.
4.
Vázquez G, Pellón A (2007) Polyurethane-coated silicone gel breast implants used for 18 years. Aesthet Plast Surg 31(4):330–336CrossRef
5.
Fleming D, Handel M, Gutierrez J (2012) Polyurethane foam covered breast implants. In: Peters W, Brandon H, Jerina KL, Wolf C, Young VL (eds) Biomaterials in plastic surgery. Elsevier, New York, pp 96–120CrossRef
6.
Castel N, Soon-Sutton T, Deptula P, Flaherty A, Parsa F (2015) Polyurethane-coated breast implants revisited: a 30-year follow-up. Arch Plast Surg 42(2):186–193PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Duxbury P, Harvey J (2016) Systematic review of the effectiveness of polyurethane-coated compared with textured silicone implants in breast surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 69(4):452–460PubMedCrossRef
8.
Frame J (2016) Commentary on: the modern polyurethane-coated implant in breast augmentation: long-term clinical experience. Aesthet Surg J 36(10):1130–1132PubMedCrossRef
9.
Pompei S, Evangelidou D, Arelli F, Ferrante G (2016) The modern polyurethane-coated implant in breast augmentation: long-term clinical experience. Aesthet Surg J 36(10):1124–1129PubMedCrossRef
10.
Pompei S, Arelli F, Labardi L, Marcasciano F, Evangelidou D, Ferrante G (2017) Polyurethane implants in 2-stage breast reconstruction: 9-year clinical experience. Aesthet Surg J 37(2):171–176PubMedCrossRef
11.
12.
Berrino P, Galli A, Rainero M, Santi P (1986) Long-lasting complications with the use of polyurethane-covered breast implants. Br J Plast Surg 39(4):549–553PubMedCrossRef
13.
Hester T (1988) The polyurethane covered mammary prosthesis: facts and Fiction. Perspect Plast Surg 2:135–164
14.
Parsa F (1988) Displaced inframammary fold after Même breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 81(4):643–644PubMedCrossRef
15.
Hester T (1990) Diagnosis and treatment of complications occurring with polyurethane-covered breast implants. Perspect Plast Surg 4:105–111
16.
Cohney B, Cohney T, Hearne V (1991) Nineteen years’ experience with polyurethane foam-covered mammary prosthesis: a preliminary report. Ann Plast Surg 27(1):27–30PubMedCrossRef
17.
Gasperoni C, Salgarello M, Gargani G (1992) Polyurethane-covered mammary implants: a 12-year experience. Ann Plast Surg 29(4):303–308PubMedCrossRef
18.
Brickman M, Parsa N, Parsa F (2004) Late hematoma after breast implantation. Aesthet Plast Surg 28:80–82CrossRef
19.
Dini G, Ferreira L (2006) Early complication with the use of polyurethane-covered breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(6):2098–2100PubMedCrossRef
20.
Prado A, Andrades P, Benitez S (2006) A word of caution on the explantation of polyurethane breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 117(5):1655–1657PubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
Dini M, Giordano V, Quattrini L, Mori A, Napoli S (2011) Double capsules: our experience with polyurethane-coated silicone breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(3):819–820PubMedCrossRef
23.
Rancati A, Soderini A, Dorr J, Gercovich G, Tessari L, Gonzalez E (2013) One-step breast reconstruction with polyurethane-covered implants after skin-sparing mastectomy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 66(12):1671–1675PubMedCrossRef
24.
Castello M, Han S, Silvestri A et al (2014) A simple method to inset and position polyurethane-covered breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 38:365–368CrossRef
25.
Scarpa C, Borso G, Vindigni V, Bassetto F (2015) Polyurethane foam-covered breast implants: a justified choice? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 19:1600–1606PubMed
26.
27.
Tebbetts J (2002) A system for breast implant selection based on patient tissue characteristics and implant-soft tissue dynamics. Plast Reconstr Surg 109(4):1396–1409 (discussion 1410-5) PubMedCrossRef
28.
Hedén P (2009) Mastopexy augmentation with form stable breast implants. Clin Plast Surg 36(1):91–104PubMedCrossRef
29.
Mallucci P, Branford O (2016) Design for natural breast augmentation: the ICE principle. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(6):1728–1737PubMedCrossRef
30.
Mallucci P, Branford OA (2012) Concepts in aesthetic breast dimensions: analysis of the ideal breast. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 65(1):8–16PubMedCrossRef
31.
LoVerme P, Kelleher J (1986) “Saline float” positioning of the polyurethane-covered breast prosthesis. Plast Reconstr Surg 77(5):845–846PubMedCrossRef
32.
Miro A (2009) Polyurethane-coated silicone breast implants: evaluation of 14 years experience. Rev Bras Cir Plast 24(3):296–303
33.
Georgeu G, Frame J, Frame J Jr (2013) Conical polyurethane implants: an uplifting augmentation. Aesthet Surg J 33:1116–1128PubMedCrossRef
34.
Handel N, Gutierrez J (2006) Long-term safety and efficacy of polyurethane foam-covered breast implants. Aesthet Surg J 26(3):265–274PubMedCrossRef
35.
Brunnert KE (2015) The micropolyurethane foam-coated Diagon/Gel®4Two implant in aesthetic and reconstructive breast surgery – 3-year results of an ongoing study. GMS Interdiscip Plast Reconstr Surg DGPW 4: Doc20
36.
Hoefflin S (1990) Extensive experience with polyurethane breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 86(1):166–167PubMedCrossRef
37.
Melmed E (1990) Treatment of breast contractures with open capsulotomy and replacement of gel prostheses with polyurethane-covered implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 86(2):270–274PubMedCrossRef
38.
Collis Nicholas, Sharpe David T (2000) Recurrence of subglandular breast implant capsular contracture: anterior versus total capsulectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 106(4):792–797PubMedCrossRef
39.
Hoffman S (1989) Correction of established capsular contractures with polyurethane implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 13:33–40CrossRef
40.
Ashley F (1972) A further studies on the natural-Y breast prothesis. Plast Reconstr Surg 49(4):414–419PubMedCrossRef
41.
Artz S, Dinner M, Foglietti M (1991) Breast reconstruction utilizing subcutaneous tissue expansion followed by polyurethane-covered silicone implants: a 6-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 88(4):635–639PubMedCrossRef
42.
Pennisi V (1990) Long-term use of polyurethane breast prostheses: a 14-year experience. Plast Reconstr Surg 86(2):368–371PubMedCrossRef
43.
Batiukov D, Podgaiski V, Ladutko D (2019) Removal of polyurethane implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 43(1):70–75CrossRef
44.
Tebbetts J (2002) Achieving a predictable 24-hour return to normal activities after breast augmentation: part I. Refining practices by using motion and time study principles. Plast Reconstr Surg 109(1):273–290 (discussion 291-2) PubMedCrossRef
45.
Tebbetts J (2002) Achieving a predictable 24-hour return to normal activities after breast augmentation: part II. Patient preparation, refined surgical techniques, and instrumentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 109(1):293–305 (discussion 306-7) PubMedCrossRef
46.
Schlesinger S (1989) The use of surgilube for inserting the polyurethane-covered gel-filled mammary implant. Plast Reconstr Surg 84(4):703 (Comment on Displaced inframammary fold after Même breast augmentation. [Plast Reconstr Surg. 1988]) PubMed
47.
Walkinson T (1985) Polyurethane-coated Implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 75(6):925–926CrossRef
48.
Vázquez G (1999) Ten-year experience using polyurethane-covered breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg 23(3):189–196CrossRef
49.
de la Penã-Salcedo J, Soto-Miranda M, Lopez-Salguero J (2012) Back to the future: a 15-year experience with polyurethane foam covered breast implants using the partial-subfascial technique. Aesthet Plast Surg 36(2):331e8
50.
Hall-Findlay E (2011) Breast implant complication review: double capsules and late seromas. Plast Reconstr Surg 127:56–66PubMedCrossRef
51.
Hall-Findlay E (2011) Reply: breast implant complication review double capsules and late seromas. Plast Reconstr Surg 128(3):818–819CrossRef
52.
53.
Grindlay J, Clagett O (1949) A plastic sponge prosthesis for use after pneumonectomy; preliminary report of an experimental study. In: Proceedings of the staff meet mayo clinic 12, vol 24, no 21, p 538
54.
Pangman W 2nd, Wallace R, Hills B (1955) The use of plastic prosthesis in breast plastic and other soft tissue surgery. West J Surg Obstet Gynecol 63(8):503–512PubMed
55.
Edgerton M, McClary A (1958) Augmentation mammaplasty; psychiatric implicationsand surgical indications; (with special reference to use of the polyvinyl alcohol sponge ivalon). Plast Reconstr Surg Transpl Bull 21(4):279–305CrossRef
56.
Schwartz A, Erich J (1960) Experimental study of polyvinylformal (ivalon) sponge as a substitute for tissue. Plast Reconstr Surg Transpl Bull 25:1–14CrossRef
57.
Howell D, Delchamps E, Riemer W (1961) Spontaneous mineral deposition in sponge biopsy connective tissue. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med 106:317–319PubMedCrossRef
58.
Pangman W (1965) Compound prosthesis device, US Patent 2,842,775
59.
Pangman W (1958) Compound prosthesis, US Patent 3,189,921
60.
Pangman W (1971) Compound prosthesis, US Patent 3,559,214
61.
Ashley FL (1970) A new type of breast prosthesis. Preliminary report. Plast Reconstr Surg 45(5):421–424PubMedCrossRef
62.
Barr S, Bayat A (2011) Breast implant surface development: perspectives on development and manufacture. Aesthet Surg J 31(1):56–67PubMedCrossRef
63.
Cohney B, Cohney T, Hearne V (1992) Augmentation mammaplasty–a further review of 20 years using the polyurethane-covered prosthesis. J Long Term Eff Med Implants 1:269–279PubMed
64.
Capozzi A, Pennisi V (1981) Clinical experience with polyurethane-covered gel-filled mammary prostheses. Plast Reconstr Surg 68(4):512–518PubMedCrossRef
65.
Batich C, Williams J, King R (1989) Toxic hydrolysis product form a biodegradable foam implant. J Biomed Mater Res 23(suppl A3):311–319PubMedCrossRef
66.
Chan S, Birdsell D, Gradeen C (1991) Detection of toluenediamines in the urine of a patient with polyurethane-covered breast implants. Clin Chem 37:756PubMedCrossRef
67.
Chan S, Birdsell D, Gradeen C (1991) Urinary excretion of free toluenediamines in a patient with polyurethane-covered breast implants. Clin Chem 37:2143PubMedCrossRef
68.
Benoit FM (1993) Degradation of polyurethane foams used in the Même breast implant. J Biomed Mater Res 27(10):1341–1348PubMedCrossRef
69.
Quaid J (1989) Method for making open-cell, silicone-elastomer medical implant, US patent 4889744
70.
Yan J, Purkait B (1991) Method of making textured surface prosthesis implants, US patent 5022942
71.
Burkhardt B, Eades E (1995) The effect of biocell texturing and povidone-iodine irrigation on capsular contracture around saline-inflatable breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 96:1317–1325PubMedCrossRef
72.
Risk Assessment Meeting on Polyurethane-Coated Breast Implants, US Food & Drug Administration, Washington, June 26, 1991
73.
Canadian Medical Association (1991) Safety of polyurethane-covered breast implants expert panel on the safety of polyurethane-covered breast implants. CMAJ 145(9):1125–1132 (Review. English, French)
74.
Harris H (1961) Survey of breast implants from the point of view of carcinogenesis. Plast Reconstr Surg Transpl Bull 28:81–83CrossRef
75.
Dunn K, Hall P, Khoo C (1992) Breast implant materials: sense and safety. Br J Plast Surg 45:315–321PubMedCrossRef
76.
Daka J, Chawla A (1993) Release of chemicals from polyurethane foam in the Même breast implant. Biomater Artif Cells Immobil Biotechnol 21(1):23–46
77.
Food and Drug Administration (1995) Update: Study of TDA Released from Polyurethane Foam-Covered Breast Implants. Rockville, Md: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; Jun 27, 1995. POLYURETHANE/toxicology/general
78.
Hester T, Ford N, Gale P et al (1997) Measurement of 2,4-toluenediamine in the urine and serum samples from women with Même or Replicon breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 100:1291–1298PubMedCrossRef
79.
Bondurant S, Ernster V, Herdman R (eds) Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on the Safety of Silicone Breast Implants. National Academies Press (US), Washington (DC)
80.
81.
Luu H, Hutter J, Bushar H (1998) A physiologically based pharmacokinetic model for 2,4-toluenediamine leached from polyurethane foam-covered breast implants. Environ Health Perspect 106(7):393–400PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
82.
83.
84.
Hamdi M (2019) Association between breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) risk and polyurethane breast implants: clinical evidence and european perspective. Aesthet Surg J 39(Supplement_1):S49–S54PubMedCrossRef
85.
Bizjak M, Selmi C, Praprotnik S et al (2015) Silicone implants and lymphoma: the role of inflammation. J Autoimmun 65:64–73PubMedCrossRef
86.
Hu H, Jacombs A, Vickery K, Merten S, Pennington D, Deva A (2015) Chronic biofilm infection in breast implants is associated with an increased T-cell lymphocytic infiltrate: implications for breast implant-associated lymphoma. Plast Reconstr Surg 135(2):319–329PubMedCrossRef
87.
Kadin M, Deva A, Xu H et al (2016) Biomarkers provide clues o early events in the pathogenesis of breast implant associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Aesthet Surg J 36(7):773–781PubMedCrossRef
88.
Atlan M, Nuti G, Wang H, Decker S, Perry T (2018) Breast implant surface texture impacts host tissue response. J Mech Behav Biomed Mater 88:377–385PubMedCrossRef
89.
Jacombs A, Tahir S, Hu H et al (2014) In vitro and in vivo investigation of the influence of implant surface on the formation of bacterial biofilm in mammary implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 133(4):471e–480ePubMedCrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Types of Errors Made During Breast Augmentation with Polyurethane Implants: A Systematic Review
verfasst von
D. Batiukov
V. Podgaiski
D. Ladutko
Publikationsdatum
07.10.2019
Verlag
Springer US
Erschienen in
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery / Ausgabe 1/2020
Print ISSN: 0364-216X
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-5241
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-019-01510-6

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 1/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Original Article

Application of the Bracing System in Reduction Malarplasty in Asian Population

Correction

Correction to: Concomitant Use of Hyaluronic Acid and Laser in Facial Rejuvenation

Original Article

The Breast Implant ARC: An Algorithm for Determining the Position of the IMF in Breast Augmentation Planning

Original Article

Deferoxamine Protects Stromal/Stem Cells of “Lull pgm System”-Processed Lipoaspirates Against Damages Induced by Mitochondrial Respiration Inhibition

Original Paper

New Insights into the Three-Dimensional Anatomy of the Facial Mimetic Muscles Related to the Nasolabial Fold: An Iodine Staining Technique Based on Nano-computed Tomography

Editor’s Invited Commentary

New Insights into the Three-Dimensional Anatomy of the Facial Mimetic Muscles Related to the Nasolabial Fold: An Iodine Staining Technique Based on Nano-computed Tomography (Discussion)

Neu im Fachgebiet Chirurgie

Wie erfolgreich ist eine Re-Ablation nach Rezidiv?

23.04.2024 Ablationstherapie Nachrichten

Nach der Katheterablation von Vorhofflimmern kommt es bei etwa einem Drittel der Patienten zu Rezidiven, meist binnen eines Jahres. Wie sich spätere Rückfälle auf die Erfolgschancen einer erneuten Ablation auswirken, haben Schweizer Kardiologen erforscht.

Hinter dieser Appendizitis steckte ein Erreger

23.04.2024 Appendizitis Nachrichten

Schmerzen im Unterbauch, aber sonst nicht viel, was auf eine Appendizitis hindeutete: Ein junger Mann hatte Glück, dass trotzdem eine Laparoskopie mit Appendektomie durchgeführt und der Wurmfortsatz histologisch untersucht wurde.

Mehr Schaden als Nutzen durch präoperatives Aussetzen von GLP-1-Agonisten?

23.04.2024 Operationsvorbereitung Nachrichten

Derzeit wird empfohlen, eine Therapie mit GLP-1-Rezeptoragonisten präoperativ zu unterbrechen. Eine neue Studie nährt jedoch Zweifel an der Notwendigkeit der Maßnahme.

Ureterstriktur: Innovative OP-Technik bewährt sich

19.04.2024 EAU 2024 Kongressbericht

Die Ureterstriktur ist eine relativ seltene Komplikation, trotzdem bedarf sie einer differenzierten Versorgung. In komplexen Fällen wird dies durch die roboterassistierte OP-Technik gewährleistet. Erste Resultate ermutigen.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Aktuelle BDC Leitlinien-Webinare

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.
Bildnachweise