INTRODUCTION: After massive weight loss, patients present with various mammary changes, such as sagging, different grades of ptosis, and empty upper pole. Different mammoplasty techniques are used to shape the mammary cone and to reposition the nipple-areolar complex (NAC). In this study, we evaluate how different surgical approaches can satisfy the requirements of each patient.
METHOD: Twenty-five patients who underwent mammoplasty following gastroplasty were analyzed. The mammoplasty techniques used were (1) mastopexy without implant with inferior flap; (2) mastopexy without implant with inferior areolar pedicle; (3) mastopexy with implant and coverage by inferior flap; (4) mastopexy with implant and plication of cross flaps (jacket procedure).
RESULTS: The average body mass index (BMI) before mammoplasty was 26.6 (ranging from 21.6 to 31.2). All patients who underwent this surgery rated the outcome obtained as good or great. In an evaluation carried out by an observer unaware of the techniques employed, the results obtained were considered to be satisfactory for breast shape, correction of breast ptosis, and filling of the upper pole. One patient who underwent mastopexy with implants and cross flaps developed seroma and subsequent capsular contracture, which required capsulectomy. Eight patients developed unilateral dehiscence: seven at the junction of skin flap in the inframammary fold, and one vertically, which were resolved with healing by secondary intention. No cases of necrosis or NAC epitheliosis were observed.
CONCLUSION: Using different mammoplasty techniques, which were personalized and analyzed on a case-by-case basis, good outcomes and a high level of patient satisfaction were achieved. Various factors, such as the furcula-papilla distance, the need to lift the NAC, pre-mammoplasty breast volume and the patient's desire to increase breast volume, influence the choice of the surgical technique.
Keywords: Body contour; Massive weight loss; Mastopexy; Mamomplasty.