title: Prosthetic breast reconstruction: indications and update.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Despite 82% of patients reporting psychosocial improvement following breast reconstruction, only 33% patients choose to undergo surgery. Implant reconstruction outnumbers autologous reconstruction in many centres.
  
  
  METHODS
  A systematic review of the literature was undertaken. Inclusion required: (I) Meta-analyses or review articles; (II) adult patients aged 18 years or over undergoing alloplastic breast reconstruction; (III) studies including outcome measures; (IV) case series with more than 10 patients; (V) English language; and (VI) publication after 1(st) January, 2000.
  
  
  RESULTS
  After full text review, analysis and data extraction was conducted for a total of 63 articles. Definitive reconstruction with an implant can be immediate or delayed. Older patients have similar or even lower complication rates to younger patients. Complications include capsular contracture, hematoma and infection. Obesity, smoking, large breasts, diabetes and higher grade tumors are associated with increased risk of wound problems and reconstructive failure. Silicone implant patients have higher capsular contracture rates but have higher physical and psychosocial function. There were no associations made between silicone implants and cancer or systemic disease. There were no differences in outcomes or complications between round and shaped implants. Textured implants have a lower risk of capsular contracture than smooth implants. Smooth implants are more likely to be displaced as well as having higher rates of infection. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) gives the best aesthetic outcome if radiotherapy is not required but has a higher rate of capsular contracture and implant failure. Delayed-immediate reconstruction patients can achieve similar aesthetic results to IBR whilst preserving the breast skin if radiotherapy is required. Delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) patients have fewer complications than IBR patients.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Implant reconstruction is a safe and popular mode of post-mastectomy reconstruction. Evidence exists for the settings in which complications are more likely, and we can now more reliably predict outcomes of reconstruction on an individual basis and assess patient suitability.
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: Tam T
authors.initials: TT
authors.lastname: Quinn
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: George S
authors.initials: GS
authors.lastname: Miller
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: Marie
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Rostek
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: Miguel S
authors.initials: MS
authors.lastname: Cabalag
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: Warren M
authors.initials: WM
authors.lastname: Rozen
authors.affiliation: 1 Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Frankston Hospital, Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 2 Monash University Plastic Surgery Group (Peninsula Clinical School), Peninsula Health, Frankston, Victoria 3199, Australia ; 3 Department of Surgery, School of Medicine and Dentistry, James Cook University Clinical School, Townsville Hospital, Townsville, Queensland 4814, Australia.
authors.forename: David J
authors.initials: DJ
authors.lastname: Hunter-Smith
keywords: Breast cancer; alloplastic; breast implant; prosthesis; reconstruction; tissue expander