Outcomes Analysis of Textured Versus Smooth Tissue Expanders in Breast Reconstruction

Introduction Because of concerns related to the correlation of breast implant–associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) and textured implants, the use of smooth devices in breast reconstruction has been increasing. Currently, there is a paucity of literature evaluating the safety of smooth tissue expanders (STEs), which are now being used more frequently in first-stage breast reconstruction. This study sought to compare the safety and outcomes associated with STEs compared with textured tissue expanders in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction. Methods A single-institution retrospective review of 394 patients undergoing tissue expander-based breast reconstruction (147 smooth and 247 textured) between 2015 and 2019 was conducted. Patient demographics, comorbidities, treatment characteristics, complications, and surgical outcomes were evaluated. Data analysis was performed using Fisher exact and t tests. Results No significant difference in demographics or complication rates were identified, including rates of hematoma, seroma, wound dehiscence, delayed wound healing, infection, tissue expander malposition, nipple necrosis, mastectomy flap necrosis, reoperation, readmission, and explantation. Average follow-up was 19 and 22 months for the smooth and textured groups, respectively. No cases of BIA-ALCL were identified in either group. Conclusions With equivocal safety profiles and no demonstrated risk in BIA-ALCL associated with STEs, this study supports the safety of using STEs compared with textured tissue expanders in prosthesis-based breast reconstruction with the advantage in preventing BIA-ALCL and concludes that there is no role for textured breast expanders.