BACKGROUND: Immediate action is required to address some complications of implant-based reconstruction after mastectomy to prevent reconstruction failure. Implant exchange may be simple but poses the risk of further complications while autologous flap reconstruction seems more complex but may pose less subsequent risk. Which of these is preferable remains unclear.
METHODS: We reviewed thirty-two female breast cancer patients who had serious complications with their breast implants after post-mastectomy reconstruction. Latissimus dorsi flap (LDF) patients underwent explantation and immediate reconstruction with an LDF, while implant exchange (IE) patients underwent immediate implant removal and exchange with an expander followed by delayed reconstruction with silicon or immediately with a smaller size silicone implant.
RESULTS: LDF patients underwent a single operation with an average duration of care of 31 days compared to an average 1.8 procedures (p= 0.005) with an average duration of care of 129.9 days (p < 0.001) among IE patients. Seven IE (50%) had serious complications that required subsequent revision while no LDF patients required additional procedures. Patient overall satisfaction and esthetics results were also superior in the LDF group at six months.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients who want to reconstructively rescue and salvage their severely infected or exposed breast implant, the LDF offers an entirely autologous solution. LDF reconstruction in this setting allows patients to avoid an extended duration of care, reduces their risk of complications, and preserves the reconstructive process.
METHODS: The journal asks authors to assign a level of evidence to each article. For a complete description of Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, see the Table of Contents or the online Instructions for Authors at www.springer.com/00266 .

Breast implant rupture is associated with multiple risk factors such as implant age, manufacturer, and a history of trauma to the breast. However, the exact mechanism of breast implant rupture remains unclear. We hypothesize that repetitive minor mechanical forces on the implant collectively play a significant role in the cascade that eventually leads to its rupture. Therefore, we expect a more significant cumulative effect on the breast implant in the dominant upper limb side. Thus, we aim to ascertain whether laterality in silicone breast implant rupture is associated with the dominant upper limb.
A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with silicone breast implants who underwent an elective breast implant removal or exchange. All patients had breast augmentations for cosmetic reasons. We collected data on implant rupture laterality and limb dominance together with known risk factors like patient age, implant age, implant pocket, and implant volume.
A total of 154 patients with unilateral implant rupture were included in the study. Among patients with a dominant right limb (n = 133), an ipsilateral rupture was found in 77 patients (58%) (p = 0.036), while in patients with a left dominant limb (n = 21), an ipsilateral rupture was found in 14 patients (67%), (p = 0.036).
The dominant limb was a significant risk factor for ipsilateral breast implant rupture. The prevailing theory that cyclic envelope movement carries an increased rupture risk is reinforced in this study. Extensive prospective studies are needed to clarify risk factors for implant rupture further.

Treatment of an infected shoulder prosthesis differs significantly from other joint infections because of the unique microbiome, dominated by Cutibacterium acnes. The cause of an infection, its time of onset, the bacterial spectrum and comorbidities have to be considered for evaluation and treatment. The diagnostic workup is sometimes complex, and the recognition of a chronic and low-grade infection is often difficult because typical clinical and laboratory markers may be normal. Treatment is surgical; the therapeutic spectrum ranges from arthroscopic irrigation and open debridement with the exchange of components to one- and two-stage revisions using antibiotic-loaded spacers. Early detection and a targeted, appropriate therapy are crucial to avoid extensive soft tissue and bone damage.
UNASSIGNED: Die Behandlung einer infizierten Schulterprothese ist eine Domäne der operativen Therapie. Sie unterscheidet sich von der anderer Gelenkinfektionen insbesondere wegen des besonderen Keimspektrums der Schulter, allen voran wegen der Besiedelung mit Cutibacterium acnes. Infektursache, Zeitpunkt des Auftretens, Keimspektrum und Komorbiditäten müssen zur Beurteilung und Therapieentscheidung herangezogen werden. Bei chronischen und „Low-grade-Infekten“ ist v. a. die Erkennung schwierig, weil typische Infektmerkmale und laborchemische Marker völlig normal sein können. Das Therapiespektrum reicht von der arthroskopischen Spülung über das offene Débridement mit Komponententausch bis hin zu ein- und zweizeitigen Prothesenwechseln unter Verwendung antibiotikabeladener Interimsprothesen. Entscheidend ist immer die frühzeitige Erkennung einer Infektion und deren sachgerechte Therapie, um ausgedehnte Folgeschäden an den Weichteilen und am Knochenlager zu vermeiden. Der Wechsel einer infizierten Schulterprothese wird aufgrund der hohen Anforderungen meist nur von spezialisierten Abteilungen sicher beherrscht.

Orbital implant materials have evolved greatly over the past century and include but are not limited to metal, ceramic, polymer, silicone, and glass. Knowledge of historically used materials is clinically relevant to patient care as certain materials carry a greater risk of migration, extrusion, infection, and limitations for imaging modalities utilized to visualize adjacent structures. We report an unusual case of an 80-year-old male who presented to our community hospital with seizure-like activity. CT imaging of the brain revealed several white matter and cortex lesions with the largest lesion measuring 2.5 × 2 × 1.9 cm. The patient had a history of enucleation with placement of an orbital implant following a penetrating injury to the left eye at four years of age. Hounsfield scale analysis was read by radiology as being most consistent with a thin metallic shell surrounding the orbital implant. The potential for metallic material was consistent with the implant\'s age and time of placement. Few reviews on ocular implant materials from this period exist in the current medical literature. A single case report discussing a hollow metal orbital implant with similar-appearing imaging was identified. Due to concern for possible metal implant materials, the patient underwent implant exchange so MRI imaging could safely be performed. Intraoperatively, the implant was identified as a clear, hollow, non-metallic, non-porous polymer sphere. Following surgery, the patient was able to undergo appropriate neuroimaging with subsequent diagnostic biopsy. Current literature reviewing CT or photographic imaging of ocular implant devices prior to the 1940s is limited. This case highlights the importance of detailing materials historically used in orbital implants, their effects on clinical decision-making, and the utility of Hounsfield scale values to identify a material\'s radiodensity on CT imaging.

Surgical options for periprosthetic femoral fracture in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are controversial. The present retrospective study compared morbidity, mortality and functional results between implant exchange (group IE) and internal fixation by plate (group IF). The study hypothesis was that implant exchange does not give rise to more complications than plate fixation and that functional results are equivalent.
Fifty-two femoral fractures in contact with a TKA implant were studied. The IE and IF groups (n 32 and 20, respectively), were comparable for age, gender and ASA score. Mean age was 80.5 years (range, 53-96 years). Morbidity and mortality were assessed on Clavien score; functional assessment used the KOOS questionnaire.
Mortality was 50% in group IF and 40% in group IE (p=0.4817). One patient was lost to follow-up. Complications were seen in 15 group IF patients (48.4%) versus 5 in group IE (26.3%) (p=0.14760), with infection in 5 (16.1%) and 2 patients (10.5%) respectively (p=0.69475). In both groups, 9 patients (i.e., 28.1% and 40% respectively) showed grade 2 complications (p=1). Revision surgery was performed in 8 grade 3b patients (25%) in the IF group and in 3 (15%) in the IE group (p=1). Mean KOOS score was 40 (range, 20-72) in IF and 65 (range, 50-93) in IE (p=0.0004).
Morbidity and mortality were comparable between implant exchange and plate fixation for periprosthetic femoral fracture in TKA. KOOS functional scores were better with implant exchange. Implant exchange may be suited to complex fracture with stable implant.
IV, observational study.

Late infection following posterior spinal fusion (PSF) for deformity is a leading cause of revision. The purpose of this study is to evaluate clinical and radiographic outcomes following a single-stage debridement and exchange of spinal implants with titanium in adolescent patients with late-onset infections following PSF METHODS: A retrospective review of prospectively collected data of adolescent patients with spinal deformity, who were surgically treated with PSF was collected. Patients were included for the study if they developed late arising infection (> 1 year after index posterior fusion for the deformity) from 2006-2019. Treatment consisted of irrigation, debridement, implant exchange with titanium screws and rods, and antibiotics. Parameters evaluated include radiographic Cobb angles, operative data, and clinical data, all at minimum 2-year follow-up.
31 patients (29 with AIS and 2 with Scheuermann\'s kyphosis) developed late spinal infections. Mean age was 11.4 ± 2.3 years, 84% female, mean time from index surgery was 52.5 months. 25 had all stainless steel implants and 6 had cobalt chrome during the index procedure. Positive cultures were obtained in 5 patients (2 Staphylococcus Aureus, 1 Staphylococcus epidermidis, 1 Peptostreptococcus, 1 Pseudomonas aeruginosa) with cultures followed till 7 days post-operatively. At 2-years following the exchange, there was no change in coronal and sagittal alignment. Three (9%) patients developed subsequent infection necessitating implant removal.
A single-stage procedure consisting of implant removal, irrigation, and debridement, and replacement with all titanium implants is an effective treatment strategy in patients developing late wound infection following PSF with regards to maintenance of curve correction and minimizing recurrent infections.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current study was to evaluate risk factors and timing of revision surgery following immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR).
METHODS: This retrospective cohort included women with a previous therapeutic mastectomy and implant-based IBR who had undergone implant revision surgery between 2005 and 2015. Data were collected by medical chart review and registered in the Stockholm Breast Reconstruction Database. The primary endpoint was implant removal due to surgical complications, i.e. implant failure.
RESULTS: The cohort consisted of 475 women with 707 revisions in 542 breasts. Overall, 33 implants were removed due to complications. The implant failure rate (4.7%) was lower without RT (2.4%) compared to RT administered after mastectomy (7.5%) and prior to IBR (6.5%) (p = 0.007). While post-mastectomy RT (OR 3.39, 95% CI 1.53-7.53), smoking (OR 3.90, 95% CI 1.76-8.65) and diabetes (OR 5.40, 95% CI 1.05-27.85) were confirmed as risk factors, time from completion of RT (> 9 months, 6-9 months, < 6 months) was not (OR 3.17, 95% CI 0.78-12.80, and OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.20-2.71). Additional risk factors were a previous axillary clearance (OR 4.91, 95% CI 2.09-11.53) and a history of a post-IBR infection (OR 15.52, 95% CI 4.15-58.01, and OR 12.93, 95% CI 3.04-55.12, for oral and intravenous antibiotics, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: Previous axillary clearance and a history of post-IBR infection emerged as novel risk factors for implant failure after revision surgery. While known risk factors were confirmed, time elapsed from RT completion to revision surgery did not influence the outcome in this analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast augmentation is one of the most common aesthetic procedures performed worldwide. One of the worst associated complications is implant rupture, a topic that will be addressed in the present study. The risk of developing silicone gel breast implant rupture following breast augmentation is associated with multiple factors, including: older generation implant, increased implant age, implant type, specific manufacturer, severe capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV), and the presence of local symptoms. We hypothesize that the plane of the implant placement may also play a role in the development of implant rupture due to differences in opposing forces upon the implant between submuscular and subglandular planes.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of potential risk factors on breast prosthesis rupture rate, focusing on implant pocket selection, capsular contracture and implant volume.
METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients with silicone breast implants in either subglandular or submuscular plane, who underwent an elective breast implant exchange, with or without mastopexy, between January 2012 and June 2017. Data collected included patient\'s age, implant age, implant pocket, implant volume, capsular contracture grade, and implant status (ruptured or intact).
RESULTS: Data was collected on 362 women (700 breasts). A total of 284 women (542 breasts) met the inclusion criteria. The average age of the subjects was 43.4 ± 10.4 years. Average implant age during exchange was 10 ± 6.1. There was no difference between the characteristics of the submuscular group and the subglandular group, except from patient age. In a univariant analysis, patient\'s age (46.4 vs. 41.8, p < 0.001) and implant age (12.2 vs. 8.92 years, p < 0.001) were associated with significantly higher rupture rate. Among ruptured implants, the relative proportion of submuscular to subglandular implants was 64%, compared to 48% among non-ruptured implants (p < 0.0001). When controlling for potential confounders, submuscular pocket (OR = 0.1835, CI95% 1.25-2.69, p = 0.002) as well as implant size (OR = 1.004, CI95% 1.001-1.007, p = 0.005) were found to be a risk factor for implant rupture.
CONCLUSIONS: A sub-muscular implant pocket was identified as a significant risk factor for implant rupture. The prevailing theory that larger size implant carries an increased risk of complications, is also reinforced in this study. Large prospective studies are needed to further clarify risk factors for implant rupture.

OBJECTIVE: Surgical site infection (SSI) following esthetic breast implant exchange occurs in up to 2% of procedures. The effect of suction drains on SSI risk in these cases remains controversial. This study aimed to assess the SSI risk in the presence of suction drains after esthetic exchange of breast implants.
METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing esthetic breast implant exchange between 2012 and 2015. SSI was determined according to the definition of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Multivariate analysis using a logistic regression model to identify independent risk factors for SSI was performed.
RESULTS: A total of 256 women (504 breasts) met the inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The mean age was 44 ± 11 years. The mean operative time was 93 ± 40 min. The mean implant age at the time of the exchange was 10.3 ± 6.5 years. Suction drains were used in 229 breasts (45.4%) and were removed after 6 ± 7 days. Twenty (4%) breasts were diagnosed with SSI, of which 17 had suction drains. Suction drain use and days until drain removal were associated with a higher risk of SSI (85.0% vs. 43.8%, p < 0.001; 6.97 days vs. 12.07 days, p < 0.001, respectively). The use of suction drains remained an independent risk factor for SSI after adjustment for age, smoking, and previous capsular contracture (OR = 10.66, CI 95% 2.42-46.82).
CONCLUSIONS: Suction drain use in esthetic breast implant exchange is associated with an increased risk of SSI. Surgeons should carefully consider using suction drains in selected cases only.

OBJECTIVE: When an implant becomes infected, implant salvage is often performed where the implant is removed, capsulectomy is performed, and a new implant is inserted. The patient is discharged with a PICC line and 6-8 weeks of intravenous (IV) antibiotics. This method has variable success and subjects the patient to long-term systemic antibiotics. In the 1960s, the use of antibiotic-impregnated beads for the treatment of chronic osteomyelitis was described. These beads deliver antibiotic directly to the site of the infection, thereby eliminating the complications of systemic IV antibiotics. This study aimed to present a case series illustrating the use of STIMULAN calcium sulfate beads loaded with vancomycin and tobramycin to increase the rate of salvage of the infected implant and forgo IV antibiotics.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients who were treated at Mount Sinai Hospital for implant infection with salvage and antibiotic beads.
RESULTS: Twelve patients were identified, 10 of whom had breast cancer. Comorbidities included hypertension, smoking, and immunocompromised status. Infections were noted anywhere from 5 days to 8 years postoperatively. Salvage was successful in 9 out of the 12 infected implants using antibiotic bead therapy without home IV antibiotics.
CONCLUSIONS: The use of antibiotic beads is promising for salvaging infected breast implants without IV antibiotics. Seventy-five percent of the implants were successfully salvaged. Of the three patients who had unsalvageable implants, one was infected with antibiotic-resistant Rhodococcus that was refractory to bead therapy and one was noncompliant with postoperative instructions.