Influence of BIA-ALCL on Placement and Choice of Texture in Breast Reconstruction According to Non-Dutch Plastic Surgeons
| Total . | 27 (100.0) . |
|---|---|
| Preferred implant placement prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Submuscular | 12 (44.4) |
| Dual-plane | 10 (37.1) |
| Subglandular | 1 (3.7) |
| Subfascial | 2 (7.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Preferred implant placement currently | |
| Submuscular | 9 (33.4) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.5) |
| Subglandular | 6 (22.2) |
| Subfascial | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant placement in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 2 (7.4) |
| No | 25 (92.6) |
| What technique has superior aesthetic outcomes? | |
| Submuscular | 7 (25.9) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.6) |
| Subglandular | 7 (25.9) |
| Subfascial | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Preferred implant texture prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Macrotextured | 8 (29.6) |
| Microtextured | 14 (51.9) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Preferred implant texture currently | |
| Macrotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Microtextured | 12 (44.4) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 9 (33.4) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant texture in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 16 (59.2) |
| No | 9 (33.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Total . | 27 (100.0) . |
|---|---|
| Preferred implant placement prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Submuscular | 12 (44.4) |
| Dual-plane | 10 (37.1) |
| Subglandular | 1 (3.7) |
| Subfascial | 2 (7.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Preferred implant placement currently | |
| Submuscular | 9 (33.4) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.5) |
| Subglandular | 6 (22.2) |
| Subfascial | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant placement in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 2 (7.4) |
| No | 25 (92.6) |
| What technique has superior aesthetic outcomes? | |
| Submuscular | 7 (25.9) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.6) |
| Subglandular | 7 (25.9) |
| Subfascial | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Preferred implant texture prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Macrotextured | 8 (29.6) |
| Microtextured | 14 (51.9) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Preferred implant texture currently | |
| Macrotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Microtextured | 12 (44.4) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 9 (33.4) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant texture in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 16 (59.2) |
| No | 9 (33.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
Values are n (%). BIA-ALCL, breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma.
Influence of BIA-ALCL on Placement and Choice of Texture in Breast Reconstruction According to Non-Dutch Plastic Surgeons
| Total . | 27 (100.0) . |
|---|---|
| Preferred implant placement prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Submuscular | 12 (44.4) |
| Dual-plane | 10 (37.1) |
| Subglandular | 1 (3.7) |
| Subfascial | 2 (7.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Preferred implant placement currently | |
| Submuscular | 9 (33.4) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.5) |
| Subglandular | 6 (22.2) |
| Subfascial | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant placement in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 2 (7.4) |
| No | 25 (92.6) |
| What technique has superior aesthetic outcomes? | |
| Submuscular | 7 (25.9) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.6) |
| Subglandular | 7 (25.9) |
| Subfascial | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Preferred implant texture prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Macrotextured | 8 (29.6) |
| Microtextured | 14 (51.9) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Preferred implant texture currently | |
| Macrotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Microtextured | 12 (44.4) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 9 (33.4) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant texture in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 16 (59.2) |
| No | 9 (33.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Total . | 27 (100.0) . |
|---|---|
| Preferred implant placement prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Submuscular | 12 (44.4) |
| Dual-plane | 10 (37.1) |
| Subglandular | 1 (3.7) |
| Subfascial | 2 (7.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
| Preferred implant placement currently | |
| Submuscular | 9 (33.4) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.5) |
| Subglandular | 6 (22.2) |
| Subfascial | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant placement in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 2 (7.4) |
| No | 25 (92.6) |
| What technique has superior aesthetic outcomes? | |
| Submuscular | 7 (25.9) |
| Dual-plane | 5 (18.6) |
| Subglandular | 7 (25.9) |
| Subfascial | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 4 (14.8) |
| Preferred implant texture prior to BIA-ALCL | |
| Macrotextured | 8 (29.6) |
| Microtextured | 14 (51.9) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 3 (11.1) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Preferred implant texture currently | |
| Macrotextured | 1 (3.7) |
| Microtextured | 12 (44.4) |
| Smooth/nanotextured | 9 (33.4) |
| Coated (eg, polyurethane) | 4 (14.8) |
| Missing | 1 (3.7) |
| Did BIA-ALCL influence implant texture in breast reconstruction? | |
| Yes | 16 (59.2) |
| No | 9 (33.4) |
| Missing | 2 (7.4) |
Values are n (%). BIA-ALCL, breast implant–associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma.
This PDF is available to Subscribers Only
View Article Abstract & Purchase OptionsFor full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.
