INTRODUCTION
The use of fat as an autologous filler in breast reconstruction began in 1895 with
Czerny, who used a patient’s lipoma to reconstruct the breast1. Its use has fallen into disuse due to morbidity in the donor area when large tissue
volumes are used. However, with the description of the fat extraction technique with
cannulas, called liposuction, plastic surgeons were offered an important tool for
fat collection as an autologous filler with low morbidity2.
However, due to the technical limitations of the time, a high number of complications
such as graft loss and steatonecrosis that led to breast calcifications, and the available
diagnostic imaging technology resources that were unable to differentiate between
steatonecrosis calcifications and breast microcalcifications, the new procedures by
the American Society of Plastic Surgery in 1987 contraindicated breast fat grafting
due to the possibility that steatonecrosis calcifications could compromise the diagnosis
of early breast neoplasms on mammography.
From 2005 onwards, with the evolution of the liposuction and fat grafting technique,
associated with the technological evolution of diagnostic imaging methods, new studies
showed the evolution of the technique of fat grafting in the breasts, with a lower
incidence of complications locally3,4,5,6.
In 2011, the first studies were published showing the oncological safety of fat grafting
in patients with breast cancer and undergoing breast reconstruction, increasing its
use in patients with breast cancer7,8,9,10,11,12,13.
Despite the ease of collecting fat grafts, the main obstacle to its use is the high
absorption rate, which varies from 20 to 90%14,15,16,17. In order to improve fat graft integration rates, with a smaller number of surgical
interventions in patients, innovations in each step of the fat tissue preparation
method were proposed18.
The most important characteristics for the success of fat grafting are patient age,
choice of the donor area, the technique of fat collection, the instrument for fat
collection, fat processing, the injection technique and the preparation of the recipient
area.19,20
The use of liposuction cannulas with a larger diameter alone has higher collection
rates of viable adipocytes in experimental models14,21.
In addition to the diameter of the cannula tube, the size and number of holes are
important for the collection22. 2-mm-diameter cannulas with four 600-μm holes and multi-perforated cannulas with
1-mm holes were proposed for micrografts on the face23.
Apart from the 3mm diameter Coleman™ fat graft collection cannula with two holes,
which is not designed for breast fat grafting, there are few proposals for innovation
in the fat collection instrument to reduce trauma in adipocytes and improve the rates
of viability and integration of fat grafts when it is desired to collect larger volumes
of fat graft for use other than the face24,25.
OBJECTIVE
To present an innovation for liposuction cannula to collect fat micrografts for use
in patients undergoing mastectomy who wish to reconstruct their breasts and optimize
their final aesthetic result.
METHODS
This is a primary, experimental, prospective, comparative and controlled study, carried
out from March 2016 to March 2017 at the Universidade Federal do Estado de São Paulo
(UNIFESP), presented to the Ethics and Research Committee of UNIFESP, having received
the number 6331150116. A search for prior patents was carried out in international
databases: Espacenet, The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), World
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), China National Intellectual Property (CNIPA)
and Japan Patent Office (JPO), the National Institute of Intellectual Property (INPI)
database, the PatBase software and Google Patents, with the keywords and classifications:
cannula, liposuction, orifice, neoplasia, A61B, A61M.
For the experimental study, a prototype of a surgical steel cannula for the fat collection
was developed and made with 10 holes at the distal end of 2 mm in diameter each, in
a hollow tube with a luminal diameter of 4 mm and 35 cm in length, with a coupler
at its proximal end for a 60ml syringe with a catheter tip and for an adapter for
a suction device for storing the fat to be used, to collect fat grafts in blocks of
fat tissue up to 2mm in diameter (micrografts) (Figure 1).
Figure 1 - Detail of the design and arrangement of the orifices of the 10-hole cannula prototype.
Figure 1 - Detail of the design and arrangement of the orifices of the 10-hole cannula prototype.
The experiment was carried out by comparing the aspiration efficiency of the prototype
with two models of liposuction cannula with a luminal diameter of 4 mm and a length
of 35 cm, with an industry-standard design and of the same brand (three holes with
a Mercedes-type design, and five holes with a design type PitanguyTM) all made by the same company (Richter®, São Paulo, Brazil), considering the same material and the same resistance of the
tubes (Figure 2).
Figure 2 - 10-hole cannula (prototype), Mercedes-type three-hole cannula, and PitanguyTM five-hole cannula.
Figure 2 - 10-hole cannula (prototype), Mercedes-type three-hole cannula, and PitanguyTM five-hole cannula.
A pilot was carried out with a model of water aspiration under continuous pressure
of 30mmHg, 20mmHg, 10mmHg, and the aspirated weight of four measurements of the three
cannulas at 30”, 60” and 90” were compared. The Aspirotec III surgical aspirator (Sismatec
company, Curitiba, Brazil) was used, with a digital scale model EHA251 of 0.1gr accuracy
and 500gr capacity (Camry electronic, Guangdong, China). As there was no statistical
difference in the volume of water aspirated between the different pressures in the
different types of the cannula, the aspiration pressure was defined at 10 mmHg in
10 measurements of the three cannulas in 30”, 60” and 90”.
The experiment of aspiration of viscous substance (soybean oil, density 0.891gr/cm3)
under continuous pressure of 10mmHg was then performed, and the aspirated weight of
10 measurements of the three cannulas at 30”, 60” and 90” was compared. The Aspirotec
III surgical aspirator (Sismatec company, Curitiba, Brazil) was used with a digital
scale model EHA251 with 0.1gr accuracy and 500gr capacity (Camry electronic, Guangdong,
China)26.
To analyze the results, Friedman’s analysis of variance was applied to each of the
cannula designs, studying the aspiration speed of grams of soybean oil/ second at
times 30”, 60”, and 90”; and the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance to compare the
three types of cannula designs, at 30”, 60”, and 90” times separately27.
In all tests, the significance level was set at 0.05 or 5%.
RESULTS
Four highly relevant patents were found (product catalog of the company Tulip Medical
- “Sorensen Harvested’ and “Sforza Harvester” cannula; WO 2014074606 (A1) - adjustable
liposuction cannula; US 8333740 B2 - tissue transfer cannula; and US 2008/0167613
- closed system and method for atraumatic, low pressure, continuous harvesting, processing,
and grafting of lipoaspirate) and a patent of medium relevance (US 5817050 A - liposuction
cannula), which differ from the proposed utility model when comparing the type of
design of the distal end of the studied cannulas and the function of the instruments
identified.
The weight in grams of soybean oil aspirated per second was higher in the five-hole
cannula group (Table 1), followed by the three-hole cannula group, and the 10-hole cannula group at times
30”, 60” and 90” when performing Friedman’s analysis of variance (30” x 60” x 90”)
(Figure 3).
Table 1 - Comparison of the weight of soybean oil aspirated at 10mmHg in the different types
of drilling of 4mm cannulas of 35cm in length.
Cannula 3 holes |
Cannula 5 holes |
Cannula 10 holes |
30” |
60” |
90” |
30” |
60” |
90” |
30” |
60” |
90” |
17.2 |
52.5 |
70.1 |
20 |
39.5 |
62.3 |
15.9 |
31.4 |
47 |
17.9 |
36.1 |
54.9 |
18 |
37.5 |
58.8 |
16.1 |
31.9 |
47.5 |
19.4 |
37.6 |
57 |
17.3 |
36.4 |
55.7 |
16.1 |
31.7 |
47.7 |
19.1 |
37.6 |
56.5 |
19 |
37 |
55.6 |
16 |
31.9 |
47.4 |
17.4 |
34.4 |
51.1 |
18.6 |
37.1 |
55.4 |
15.7 |
31.4 |
48.3 |
17.4 |
32.9 |
50 |
18.8 |
38 |
55 |
15.7 |
31.4 |
47.2 |
16.7 |
32.9 |
49.3 |
19 |
37 |
54.6 |
15.7 |
31.3 |
46.9 |
18.5 |
35.9 |
53.9 |
20 |
39 |
57.4 |
15.4 |
30.6 |
46.6 |
17.3 |
35.3 |
51.4 |
18.8 |
37.4 |
56.5 |
15.4 |
31.5 |
47.1 |
12.1 |
23.4 |
45.9 |
19.1 |
37.7 |
57.5 |
21.4 |
42.9 |
57.4 |
Average 17.3 |
35.9 |
54.0 |
18.9 |
37.7 |
56.9 |
16.3 |
32.6 |
48.3 |
Median 17.4 |
35.6 |
52.7 |
18.9 |
37.4 |
56.1 |
15.8 |
31.4 |
47.3 |
Friedman’s analysis of variance (30”x60”x90”) |
Cannula 3 holes |
Cannula 5 holes |
Cannula 10 holes |
X2r= 20.00
|
X2r= 20.00
|
X2r= 20.00
|
(p<0.0001)
|
(p<0.0001)
|
(p<0.0001)
|
90”>30” |
90”>30” |
90”>30” |
Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance (30”x60”x90”) |
30” |
60” |
90” |
H= 12.69 |
H= 12.70 |
H= 13.89 |
p=0.0018
|
p=0.0017
|
p=0.0010
|
Cannula de 5 holes >10 holes |
Cannula de 5 holes >10 holes |
Cannula de 5 holes >10 holes |
Cannula de 5 holes > 3 holes |
Cannula de 5 holes > 3 holes |
Cannula de 5 holes > 3 holes |
Table 1 - Comparison of the weight of soybean oil aspirated at 10mmHg in the different types
of drilling of 4mm cannulas of 35cm in length.
Figure 3 - Friedman analysis of variance for each of the cannula designs studying the aspiration
speed of grams of soybean oil/second at 30”, 60” and 90” times.
Figure 3 - Friedman analysis of variance for each of the cannula designs studying the aspiration
speed of grams of soybean oil/second at 30”, 60” and 90” times.
When comparing the aspirated weight of soybean oil per second between the five-hole
cannula X three-hole cannula X 10-hole cannula groups, the five-hole cannula aspirated
a greater amount of soybean oil per second. However, there was no statistical difference
between the weight of soybean oil aspirated per second between the three-hole cannula
and 10-hole cannula groups by the Kruskal-Wallis test (Figure 4).
Figure 4 - Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance comparing the three types of cannula designs,
at 30”, 60”, and 90” times separately.
Figure 4 - Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance comparing the three types of cannula designs,
at 30”, 60”, and 90” times separately.
DISCUSSION
Breast cancer is the second most common type worldwide after non-melanoma skin cancer.
It is the most common among women, accounting for 25% of new cases yearly. In men,
it represents 1% of all cases of the disease. In Brazil, the estimate was 66,280 new
cases for the year 2020. In 2019, the number of deaths from breast cancer was 18,285,
with 227 men and 18,068 women28.
Mastectomized patients undergoing breast reconstruction have a better quality of life,
self-esteem, and improved sexuality compared to non-reconstructed patients29,30.
Fat grafting alone or associated with the reconstruction technique with autologous
or alloplastic tissue aims to improve reconstruction quality, especially in irradiated
skin13.
In 2015, a systematic review on fat grafting was published, which concluded that although
there is a difference in the survival of adipocytes according to the collection with
liposuction cannulas of different types and diameters in experimental models, when
performed in humans, this difference is not significant18.
In 2016, a new systematic review did not identify differences between the different
types of cannula diameter for the same design in the viability of fat grafts31.
The development of new cannulas for fat graft collection is necessary to reduce the
incidence of local complications such as volume reduction and the need for new surgical
interventions to volumize the breasts.
The definition of the collection of more symmetrical blocks of fat up to 2.0 mm in
diameter for use as a fat graft, which would be collected and stored in syringes or
a larger reservoir with the use of a vacuum cleaner, in a less traumatic way and with
low morbidity in the donor area, with the possibility of fewer surgical interventions
in this group of patients to achieve the planned result, and that did not significantly
prolong the surgical time with increased morbidity of the procedure in patients, were
the main motivations that led to the elaboration of a utility model proposal for the
INPI patent MU 6602563-0 U2.
It features a new design at its distal end, with 10 holes with a fixed diameter of
2.0mm, an internal diameter of the cannula of 4.0mm and a length of 35cm, with the
sole objective of less traumatic and more efficient collection of fat, possibly with
a greater number of viable adipocytes and an increased possibility of integration
into the recipient bed, for use in breast reconstruction.
The thickness of the graft and its geometric shape are inversely proportional to the
survival of the fat graft if the graft diameter exceeds 3.0 mm in diameter (radius
of 1.5 + 5 mm). Therefore, the size of the chosen block of fat of up to 2.0 mm in
diameter has a greater chance of being integrated into the recipient bed when this
criterion is analyzed separately in the collection, defined by the type of cannula
to be used32,33,34,35,36,37.
The dimension of the fat block of micrografts up to 2.0mm is determined by the diameter
of the 2.0mm hole at the distal end through which the fat enters the collection cannula
in a smooth and less traumatic tube and, in addition to promoting a greater possibility
of survival of the adipocyte in the recipient bed and greater possibility of integration
of this fat, the dimensions of the cannula (length, diameter, number and positioning
of the holes) allow to collect a greater amount of fat in a shorter surgical time,
and, therefore, a smaller number of surgical interventions required for volumization
of the reconstructed breast with autologous fat graft. There was no difference in
the speed of aspiration of soybean oil between the three-hole Mercedes cannula and
the 10-hole prototype cannula.
CONCLUSION
The innovation presented with the making of a prototype with 10 holes of 2mm in diameter
at its distal end was developed for the efficient collection of fat blocks up to 2mm
for use in breast reconstruction and presented the same aspiration efficiency of the
viscous substance oil of soybean when compared to the industry standard three-hole
Mercedes design cannula design.
REFERENCES
1. Delay E, Guerid S. The Role of Fat Grafting in Breast Reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg.
2015;42(3):315-23.
2. Illouz YG. Body contouring by lipolysis: a 5-year experience with over 3000 cases.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 1983;72(5):591-7.
3. Spear SL, Wilson HB, Lockwood MD. Fat injection to correct contour deformities in
the reconstructed breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;116(5):1300-5.
4. Coleman SR, Saboeiro A P. Fat grafting to the breast revisited: safety and efficacy.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119(3):775-85; discussion 786-7.
5. Millet E, Haik J, Ofir E, Mardor Y, Winkler E, Harats M, et al. The Impact of Autologous
Fat Grafting on Breast Cancer: An Experimental Model Using Magnetic Resonance Imaging.
Isr Med Assoc J. 2016;18(5):283-5.
6. Pinell-White XA, Etra J, Newell M, Tuscano D, Shin K, Losken A. Radiographic Implications
of Fat Grafting to the Reconstructed Breast. Breast J. 2015;21(5):520-5.
7. Petit JY, Lohsiriwat V, Clough KB, Sarfati I, Ihrai T, Rietjens M, et al. The oncologic
outcome and immediate surgical complications of lipofilling in breast cancer patients:
a multicenter study--Milan-Paris-Lyon experience of 646 lipofilling procedures. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(2):341-6.
8. Largo RD, Tchang LA, Mele V, Scherberich A, Harder Y, Wettstein R, et al. Efficacy,
safety and complications of autologous fat grafting to healthy breast tissue: a systematic
review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(4):437-48.
9. Kronowitz SJ, Mandujano CC, Liu J, Kuerer HM, Smith B, Garvey P, et al. Lipofilling
of the Breast Does Not Increase the Risk of Recurrence of Breast Cancer: A Matched
Controlled Study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(2):385-93.
10. Silva-Vergara C, Fontdevila J, Descarrega J, Burdio F, Yoon TS, Grande L. Oncological
outcomes of lipofilling breast reconstruction: 195 consecutive cases and literature
review. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2016;69(4):475-81.
11. Simonacci F, Bertozzi N, Grieco M P, Grignaffini E, Raposio E. Autologous fat transplantation
for breast reconstruction: A literature review. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2016;12:94-100.
12. Petit JY, Rietjens M, Botteri E, Rotmensz N, Bertolini F, Curigliano G, et al. Evaluation
of fat grafting safety in patients with intraepithelial neoplasia: a matched-cohort
study. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(6):1479-84.
13. Petit JY, Maisonneuve P, Rotmensz N, Bertolini F, Clough KB, Sarfati I, et al. Safety
of Lipofilling in Patients with Breast Cancer. Clin Plast Surg. 2015;42(3):339-44.
14. Erdim M, Tezel E, Numanoglu A, Sav A. The effects of the size of liposuction cannula
on adipocyte survival and the optimum temperature for fat graft storage: an experimental
study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2009;62(9):1210-4.
15. Sommer B, Sattler G. Current concepts of fat graft survival: histology of aspirated
adipose tissue and review of the literature. Dermatol Surg. 2000;26(12):1159-66.
16. Kim HY, Jung BK, Lew DH, Lee DW. Autologous Fat Graft in the Reconstructed Breast:
Fat Absorption Rate and Safety based on Sonographic Identification. Arch Plast Surg.
2014;41(6):740-7.
17. Seaman SA, Tannan SC, Cao Y, Peirce SM, Lin KY. Differential Effects of Processing
Time and Duration of Collagenase Digestion on Human and Murine Fat Grafts. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2015;136(2):189e-99e.
18. Strong AL, Cederna PS, Rubin J P, Coleman SR, Levi B. The Current State of Fat Grafting:
A Review of Harvesting, Processing, and Injection Techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg.
2015;136(4):897-912.
19. Khouri R, Del Vecchio D. Breast reconstruction and augmentation using pre-expansion
and autologous fat transplantation. Clin Plast Surg. 2009;36(2):269-80.
20. Coleman SR. Structural fat grafts: the ideal filler? Clin Plast Surg. 2001;28(1):111-9.
21. Kirkham JC, Lee JH, Medina MA 3rd, McCormack MC, Randolph MA, Austen WG Jr. The impact
of liposuction cannula size on adipocyte viability. Ann Plast Surg. 2012;69(4):479-81.
22. Nguyen PS, Desouches C, Gay AM, Hautier A, Magalon G. Development of micro-injection
as an innovative autologous fat graft technique: The use of adipose tissue as dermal
filler. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65(12):1692-9.
23. Alharbi Z, Opländer C, Almakadi S, Fritz A, Vogt M, Pallua N. Conventional vs. micro-fat
harvesting: how fat harvesting technique affects tissue-engineering approaches using
adipose tissue-derived stem/stromal cells. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2013;66(9):1271-8.
24. Kakagia D, Pallua N. Autologous fat grafting: in search of the optimal technique.
Surg Innov. 2014;21(3):327-36.
25. Mentor - The Coleman™ Microinjection System [acesso 2021 Jul 11]. Disponível em: http://www.melon.fi/esitteet/Coleman-esite.pdf
26. Beck DO, Davis K, Rohrich RJ. Enhancing lipoaspirate efficiency by altering liposuction
cannula design. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2014;2(10):e222.
27. Siegel S, Castellan Junior NJ. Estatística não-paramétrica para ciências do comportamento.
2ª ed. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2006. 448 p.
28. Brasil. Ministério da Saúde. Instituto Nacional do Câncer (INCA). Portal de informações
sobre câncer de mama. Brasília: Ministério da Saúde; 2021 [acesso 2021 jul 11]. Disponível
em: https://www.inca.gov.br/tipos-de-cancer/cancer-de-mama
29. Weichman KE, Broer PN, Thanik VD, Wilson SC, Tanna N, Levine J P, et al. Patient-Reported
Satisfaction and Quality of Life following Breast Reconstruction in Thin Patients:
A Comparison between Microsurgical and Prosthetic Implant Recipients. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2015;136(2):213-20.
30. Zhong T, Hu J, Bagher S, Vo A, O’Neill AC, Butler K, et al. A Comparison of Psychological
Response, Body Image, Sexuality, and Quality of Life between Immediate and Delayed
Autologous Tissue Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Long-Term Outcome Study. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2016;138(4):772-80.
31. Sinno S, Wilson S, Brownstone N, Levine SM. Current Thoughts on Fat Grafting: Using
the Evidence to Determine Fact or Fiction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;137(3):818-24.
32. Carpaneda CA. Study of aspirated adipose tissue. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1996;20(5):399-402.
33. Carpaneda CA, Ribeiro MT. Study of the histologic alterations and viability of the
adipose graft in humans. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1993;17(1):43-7.
34. Eto H, Kato H, Suga H, Aoi N, Doi K, Kuno S, et al. The fate of adipocytes after nonvascularized
fat grafting: evidence of early death and replacement of adipocytes. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2012;129(5):1081-92.
35. Kato H, Mineda K, Eto H, Doi K, Kuno S, Kinoshita K, et al. Degeneration, regeneration,
and cicatrization after fat grafting: dynamic total tissue remodeling during the first
3 months. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133(3):303e-13e.
36. Vazquez OA, Markowitz MI, Becker H. Fat Graft Size: Relationship Between Cannula and
Needle Diameters. Cureus. 2020;12(4):e7598.
37. James IB, Bourne DA, DiBernardo G, Wang SS, Gusenoff JA, Marra K, et al. The Architecture
of Fat Grafting II: Impact of Cannula Diameter. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018;142(5):1219-25.
1. Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
2. Hospital do Servidor Público Estadual de São Paulo, Instituto de Assistência Médica
ao Servidor Público Estadual, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Corresponding author: Maurício da Silva Lorena de Oliveira Rua Botucatu, 740, 2º andar, São Paulo, SP, Brazil Zip Code: 04023-061 E-mail: drmauriciolorena@gmail.com
Article received: July 11, 2021.
Article accepted: April 07, 2022.
Conflicts of interest: none.
Institution: Universidade Federal de São Paulo, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.