Skip to main content
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open logoLink to Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open
. 2022 Nov 30;10(11 Suppl):8. doi: 10.1097/01.GOX.0000905136.01257.2b

Is a Third Attempt of Breast Reconstruction Worth It? Analysis of Outcomes of Infection-associated Failed Secondary Implant-based Reconstruction

Abbas M Hassan 1, Jackie Tran 1, Malke Asaad 1, Cedar Slovacek 1, Jun Liu 1, Charles E Butler 1
PMCID: PMC9708162

Background: Implant-based reconstruction is the most common method of breast reconstruction in the United States. Despite ongoing advancements, periprosthetic infection is a serious problem that often results in device explantation. The objective of this study was to evaluate the outcomes of third-attempt reconstruction in patients in whom secondary implant-based reconstruction failed owing to infection.

Methods: The authors performed a retrospective review of patients who underwent mastectomy followed by implant-based reconstruction from 2000 to 2019. The outcomes of patients who had failed secondary implant-based reconstruction due to infection and ultimately underwent third-attempt breast reconstruction were analyzed.

Results: Of 6,093 patients who underwent primary implant-based reconstruction, 13 patients had third-attempt breast reconstruction following infection-related explantation (median age, 52 [51-56] years; median body mass index, 23 [22-31] kg/m2; median follow-up of 46 [16-62] months). Nine patients (70%) had implant-based reconstruction, two (15%) had implant-based reconstruction combined with pedicled latissimus dorsi flap, and two (15%) had abdominal-based free tissue transfer. Third-attempt breast reconstruction was immediate in 46% of patients and delayed in 54%. The success rate was 78% in the implant-based reconstruction group, with a 23% complication rate. The success rate for autologous breast reconstruction was 100%, with one patient developing venous congestion necessitating return to the operating room.

Conclusion: Third-attempt breast reconstruction following infection-associated failed secondary implant-based reconstruction is a safe and feasible option. Although the risk of failure is higher than that for primary implant-based reconstruction, a third attempt after secondary IBR infection had a surprisingly high 78% success rate.


Articles from Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Global Open are provided here courtesy of Wolters Kluwer Health

RESOURCES