The Impact of Breast Implant Cohesivity on Rippling and Revision Procedures in 2-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction

• Published in: Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum Vol. 6; p. ojae028
• Main Authors: Parikh, Neil, Gadiraju, Goutam K, Prospero, Matthew, Shen, Yizhuo, Starr, Bryce F, Reiche, Erik, Hyland, Colby J, Karinja, Sarah J, Broyles, Justin M
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Oxford University Press 04.01.2024
• Subjects: Original
• DOI: 10.1093/asjof/ojae028
• ISSN: 2631-4797

Rippling remains one of the most common complications following prepectoral implant-based reconstruction (IBR). The purpose of this study was to assess how implant cohesivity, a measure of elasticity and form stability, affects the incidence of rippling in prepectoral IBR. We performed a retrospective cohort study of 2-stage prepectoral IBR performed between January 2020 and June 2022 at the Brigham and Women's Hospital and Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, comparing outcomes in patients who received Allergan Natrelle least cohesive, moderately cohesive, and most cohesive silicone gel implants. Outcomes of interest were rippling and reoperation for fat grafting. A total of 129 patients were identified, of whom 52 had the least cohesive implants, 24 had the moderately cohesive implants, and 53 patients had the most cohesive implants. The mean follow-up time was 463 (±220) days. A decreased incidence of rippling was seen with moderately cohesive (odds ratio [OR] 0.30, < .05) and most cohesive (OR 0.39, < .05) implants. Third stage reoperation for fat grafting was less frequent in patients with the most cohesive implant (OR 0.07, < .05). In subgroup analyses, the patients with the most cohesive implant, who did not receive fat grafting at the time of initial implant placement, did not require reoperation for fat grafting (0%). The use of highly cohesive implants in prepectoral IBR is associated with decreased rippling and fewer reoperations for fat grafting.