Secondary Logo

Journal Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Secondary Reduction Mammaplasty: Is Using a Different Pedicle Safe?

Losee, Joseph E. M.D.; Caldwell, Elethea H. M.D.; Serletti, Joseph M. M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: October 2000 - Volume 106 - Issue 5 - p 1004-1008
Articles
Buy

Reduction mammaplasty is a frequently performed procedure and one with consistent patient satisfaction. Few patients present for revisional procedures, and even fewer present for a secondary or repeated reduction mammaplasty. This study defines secondary reduction mammaplasty as performing an additional reduction using a pedicled nipple-areola complex. Few reports of secondary reduction are found in the literature. Operative guidelines for secondary reduction mammaplasty have been published recently. However, the experience of others has differed from these guidelines, and herein is presented another experience with secondary reduction mammaplasty. Ten cases of secondary reduction over a 37-year period were identified and reviewed. The initial reductions were performed using six different techniques. An average of 307 g of tissue per breast (range, 130 to 552 g) was removed at the initial operations. The secondary reductions were performed using four different techniques, and an average of 458 g of tissue per breast (range, 147 to 700 g) was removed at the secondary operations. Three of the 10 patients underwent initial and secondary reduction with the same technique. An average of 4 years (range, 1 to 10 years) separated these surgeries. Seven of the 10 patients underwent initial and secondary reductions with different technique. An average of 15 years (range, 5 to 19 years) separated these procedures. There was an average 5-year follow-up (range, 1 to 20 years) in this series. Four of the 10 patients experienced self-limiting complications after secondary reduction, including delay in wound healing, delay in the return of nipple sensitivity, and mild fat necrosis. Three of the four patients with complications had undergone secondary reduction with a different pedicle technique. No significant or long-lasting skin, pedicle, or nipple-areola complex compromise was found after secondary reduction mammaplasty. In contrast to the recently published guidelines, this study demonstrates that secondary reduction mammaplasty is a safe and viable option when performed with either similar or different technique. This finding allows secondary reduction mammaplasty to be tailored to the individual breast type and to the abilities of the specific surgeon.

Rochester, N.Y.

From the Division of Plastic Surgery, University of Rochester, Strong Memorial Hospital, Rochester.

Received for publication December 16, 1999.

Joseph E. Losee, M.D. Box 661 601 Elmwood Avenue Rochester, N.Y. 14642 joseph_losee@urmc.rochester.edu

Presented at the Plastic Surgery Senior Residents Conference, in Galveston, Texas, on April 23, 1999, and at the 16th Annual Meeting of the Northeastern Society of Plastic Surgeons, in Burlington, Vermont, on October 1, 1999.

©2000American Society of Plastic Surgeons