medigraphic.com
ISSN 2992-8559 (Digital)
ISSN 1405-0625 (Impreso)

2019, Número 1

<< Anterior Siguiente >>

Cir Plast 2019; 29 (1)


Seroma: una alerta de patologías relacionadas a implantes mamarios. Medicina basada en evidencia

Cuenca-Pardo J, Vélez BE, Ramos-Gallardo G, Iribarren MR

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 50
Paginas: 15-34
Archivo PDF: 340.10 Kb.


RESUMEN

Existe un subregistro de la incidencia del seroma relacionado a implantes mamarios. No hay un criterio uniforme con respecto al tratamiento y a la cantidad de líquido acumulada para considerarla como una manifestación patológica. Para dar respuesta a las preguntas de un escenario que frecuentemente se presenta a un cirujano plástico como el de una mujer con implantes mamarios de varios años que tiene aumento de volumen de una de sus mamas acompañado de inflamación, realizamos una revisión sistemática. Todas las pacientes con implantes mamarios deben tener una revisión anual médica por su cirujano. Cuando presenten aumento de volumen, asimetrías e inflamación, se deberá descartar la presencia de un seroma, cuya confirmación requiere de ultrasonido y/o resonancia magnética. En caso de confirmarse un seroma, se deberá realizar una punción-aspiración del líquido y enviarlo a estudio de laboratorio para análisis citoquímico, cultivos, estudios de patologías, inmunomarcadores y citometría de flujo. Son varias patologías mamarias que pueden detectarse por el estudio del líquido aspirado, la más temida es el linfoma BIA-ALCL. La mayoría de los seromas se resuelven satisfactoriamente con un tratamiento conservador. En un grupo de pacientes el seroma es una manifestación de alerta de diferentes patologías relacionadas a los implantes mamarios. El estudio del líquido acumulado alrededor de las prótesis es de mucha utilidad para determinar la etiología de los seromas.


REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

  1. Lista F, Ahmad J. Evidence-based medicine: augmentation mammaplasty. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (6): 1684-1696.

  2. Ronchi A, Montella M, Argenzio V, Lucia A, De Renzo A, Alfano R et al. Diagnosis of anaplastic large cell lymphoma on late peri-implant breast seroma: management of cytological sample by an integrated approach. Cytopathology 2018; 29 (3): 294-299.

  3. Derby BM, Codner MA. Textured silicone breast implant use in primary augmentation: Core Data Update and Review. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 135: 113-124.

  4. Lista F, Tutino R, Khan A, Ahmad J. Subglandular breast augmentation with textured, anatomic, cohesive silicone implants: a review of 440 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132 (2): 295-302.

  5. Bengtson B, Brody GS, Brown MH, Glicksman C, Hammond D, Kaplan H et al. Managing late periprosthetic fluid collections (seroma) in patients with breast implants: a consensus panel recommendation and review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128 (1): 1-7.

  6. Jordan SW, Khavanin N, Kim JYS. Seroma in prosthetic breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (4): 1104-1116.

  7. Brohim RM, Foresman PA, Hildebrandt PK, Rodeheaver GT. Early tissue reactions to textured breast implant surfaces. Ann Plast Surg 1992; 28: 354-362.

  8. Malata CM, Feldberg L, Coleman DJ, Foo IT, Sharpe DT. Textured or smooth implants for breast augmentation? Three year follow-up of a prospective randomized controlled trial. Br J Plast Surg 1997; 50: 99-105.

  9. Coleman DJ, Foo IT, Sharpe DT. Textured or smooth implants for breast augmentation? A prospective controlled trial. Br J Plast Surg 1991; 44: 444-448.

  10. Collis N, Coleman D, Foo IT, Sharpe DT. Ten-year review of a prospective randomized controlled trial of textured versus smooth subglandular silicone gel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 106: 786-791.

  11. Hall-Findlay EJ. Breast implant complication review: Double capsules and late seromas. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 56-66.

  12. Spear SL, Rottman SJ, Glicksman C, Brown M, Al-Attar A. Late seromas after breast implants: Theory and practice. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130: 423-435.

  13. Santanelli di Pompeo F, Laporta R, Sorotos M, Di Napoli A, Giovagnoli MR et al. Breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma: proposal for a monitoring protocol. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136: 144e-151e.

  14. Di Napoli A. Achieving reliable diagnosis in late breast implant seromas: from reactive to anaplastic large cell lymphoma. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 143: 15S-22S.

  15. Becker H, Klimczak J. Aspiration of periprosthetic seromas using the blunt seroma cath. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 137 (2): 473-475.

  16. Chourmouzi D, Vryzas T, Drevelegas A. New spontaneous breast seroma 5 years after augmentation: A case report. Cases J 2009; 2: 7126.

  17. Fodor L, Moscona R. Late post-traumatic intracapsular seroma after breast augmentation. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2009; 62: e609-e610.

  18. Hasham S, Akhtar S, Fourie LR. Persistent seroma following breast prosthesis explantation: A case report and review. Eur J Plast Surg 2006; 28: 490-493.

  19. Mazzocchi M, Dessy LA, Carlesimo B, Marchetti F, Scuderi N. Late seroma formation after breast surgery with textured silicone implants: a problem worth bearing in mind. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125: 176e-177e.

  20. Mazzocchi M, Dessy LA, Corrias F, Scuderi N. A clinical study of late seroma in breast implantation surgery. Aesthet Plast Surg 2012; 36 (1): 97-104.

  21. Oliveira VM, Roveda-Junior D, Lucas FB et al. Late seroma after breast augmentation with silicone prostheses: a case report. Breast J 2007; 13: 421-423.

  22. Tansley PD, Powell BW. Late swelling after bilateral breast augmentation. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2011; 64: 261-263.

  23. Pinchuk V, Tymofii O. Seroma as a late complication after breast augmentation. Aesthet Plast Surg 2011; 35 (3): 315-318.

  24. Bumaschny E, Raffa CI, Reichman P. Evaluación preoperatoria del paciente quirúrgico. En: F Galindo et al. Enciclopedia de cirugía digestiva. Buenos Aires: 2013; tomo I -101, pp. 1-20. www.sacd.org.ar

  25. Guía de Referencia Rápida. Diagnóstico y tratamiento de la infección aguda, no complicada del tracto urinario en la mujer. Guía de Práctica Clínica IMSS-077-08.

  26. López-Tagle D, Hernández-Ferrer M, Saldivar-Arias T, Sotolongo-Hernández T, Valdés-Dupeyrón O. Infección de la herida quirúrgica: aspectos epidemiológicos. Rev Cub Med Mil 2007; 36 (2): 1-11.

  27. Pineda V, Cáceres J, Pernas JC, Català J. Retromammary fluid collection as a late complication of breast implants: magnetic resonance imaging findings. J Comput Assist Tomogr 2004; 28: 386-389.

  28. Bengtson BP, Eaves FF III. High-resolution ultrasound in the detection of silicone gel breast implant shell failure: background, in vitro studies, and early clinical results. Aesthet Surg J 2012; 32: 157-174.

  29. Chung KC, Malay S, Shauver MJ, Kim HM. Economic analysis of screening strategies for rupture of silicone gel breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 130: 225-237.

  30. McCarthy CM, Pusic AL, Kerrigan CL. Silicone breast implants and magnetic resonance imaging screening for rupture: do U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommendations reflect an evidence-based practice approach to patient care. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (4): 1127-1134.

  31. Clemens MW, Jacobsen ED, Horwitz SM. 2019 NCCN Consensus Guidelines on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Implant-Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (BIA-ALCL). Aesthet Surg J 2019; 39: S3-S13.

  32. Adams WP, Bengston BP, Glicksman CA et al. Decision and management algorithms to address patient and food and drug administration concerns regarding breast augmentation and implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 114: 1252-1257.

  33. Gray L. Silicone breast implants and magnetic resonance imaging screening for rupture: Do U.S. Food and Drug Administration recommendations reflect an evidence based practice approach to patient care? Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 122: 1591-1592.

  34. Song JW, Kim HM, Bellfi LT, Chung KC. The effect of study design biases on the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging for detecting silicone breast implant ruptures: A meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 1029-1044.

  35. Handel N, Garcia ME, Wixtrom R. Breast implant rupture: causes, incidence, clinical impact, and management. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132: 1128-1137.

  36. Gunawardana RT, Dessauvagie BF, Taylor DB. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma, an under-recognized entity. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol 2019. https://doi.org/10.1111/1754-9485.12905.

  37. Leberfinger AN, Behar BJ, Williams NC, Rakszawski KL, Potochny JD, Mackay DR, Ravnic DJ. Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma: a systematic review. JAMA Surg 2017; 152 (12): 1161-1168.

  38. Fitzal F, Turne SD, Kenner L. Is breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma a hazard of breast implant surgery? Open Biol 2019; 9: 190006. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsob.190006

  39. Mazzocchi M, Dessy LA, Marchetti F, Marchetti F, Carlesimo B. The use of the Veress needle to drain mammary periprosthetic fluid. In Vivo 2010; 24: 219-222.

  40. Garcia-Tutor E, Murillo J. Safe drainage by puncture of post mastectomy seroma in a patient with immediate reconstruction using an expander. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111: 1357-1358.

  41. Moyer KE, Potochny JD. Technique for seroma drainage in implant-based breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012; 65: 1614-1617.

  42. Ramos-Gallardo G, Cuenca-Pardo J, Rodríguez-Olivares E, Iribarren-Moreno R, Contreras-Bulnes L, Vallarta-Rodríguez A et al. Breast implant and anaplastic large cell lymphoma meta-analysis. J Invest Surg 2017; 30: 56-65.

  43. Pinsolle V, Grinfeder C, Mathoulin-Pelissier S, Faucher A. Complications analysis of 266 immediate breast reconstructions. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2006; 59: 1017-1024.

  44. Francis SH, Ruberg RL, Stevenson KB, Beck CE, Ruppert AS, Harper JT et al. Independent risk factors for infection in tissue expander breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124: 1790-1796.

  45. Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris T, Momen B, Manson P. Infectious complications following breast reconstruction with expanders and implants. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 112: 467-476.

  46. Rubino C, Brongo S, Pagliara D, Cuomo R, Abbinante G et al. Infections in breast implant: a review a focus and developing countries. J Infect Dev Ctries 2014; 8 (9): 1089-1095.

  47. Washer LL, Gutowski K. Breast implant infections. Infect Dis Clin N Am 2012; 26: 111-125.

  48. Cuenca-Pardo J, Ramos-Gallardo G, Contreras-Bulnes L, Iribarren-Moreno R, Rodríguez-Olivares E, Hernández-Valverde C et al. Factores relacionados con infecciones en implantes mamarios. Cir Plast 2015; 25 (1): 6-14.

  49. Barrera-Ramírez L, Drago-Serrano ME, Pérez-Ramos J, Zamora AC, Gómez-Arroyo F, Sainz-Espuñes T et al. Citometría de flujo: vínculo entre la investigación básica y la aplicación clínica. Rev Inst Nal Enf Resp Mex 2004; 17 (1): 42-55.

  50. Lopresti A, Malergue F, Bertucci F, Liberatoscioli ML, Garnier S, DaCosta Q et al. Sensitive and easy screening for circulating tumor cells by flow cytometry. JCI Insight 2019; 5. pii: 128180. doi: 10.1172 / jci.insight.128180.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com