PDF herunterladen
CC BY 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2024; 51(01): 062-066
DOI: 10.1055/a-2181-8621
Breast/Trunk
Case Report

Management of Gestational Gigantomastia with Goldilocks Procedure after Mastectomy: A Case Report and Review of Literature

Ho Yoon Jeong 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
,
Taewoo Kang 
2   Busan Cancer Center and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, and Department of Surgery, Pusan National University, School of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
,
Heeseung Park 
2   Busan Cancer Center and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, and Department of Surgery, Pusan National University, School of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
,
Kyoung Eun Kim 
2   Busan Cancer Center and Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, and Department of Surgery, Pusan National University, School of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
,
Su Bong Nam 
4   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Yangsan, Republic of Korea
,
Ju Young Go 
5   Atelier Plastic Surgery Clinic, Seoul, Republic of Korea
,
Seong Hwan Bae 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Pusan National University School of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea
3   Biomedical Research Institute, Pusan National University Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea
› Institutsangaben Funding This work was supported by clinical research grant from Pusan National University Hospital in 2021.
› Weitere Informationen
   Lizenzen und Reprints

Abstract

Gestational gigantomastia is characterized by the rapid growth of breasts during pregnancy. The treatment method of gestational gigantomastia is unclear; if the medical treatment is ineffective, surgery is considered. However, sufficient research on which method is best to perform breast reconstruction for the gestational gigantomastia patient has not yet been conducted. Our patient was young and had aesthetic needs; thus, we did not recommend modified radical mastectomy. However, it was difficult for the patient to consider active reconstruction using an implant or autologous tissue because of the expected complications and economic problems. The patient had a thin body shape and very large breasts compared with the trunk. Therefore, breast volume was not significantly required after reconstruction. Additionally, we expected that a considerable portion of skin would remain after mastectomy as a tubular-shaped breast. It was expected that the Goldilocks technique would be sufficient to meet the patient's volume needs. Therefore, we proceeded with total mastectomy and reconstruction using the Goldilocks procedure. No complications were recorded after the operation; most of the patient's discomfort was resolved, and the shape and size of the breasts were satisfactory.

Keywords

gigantomastia - mastectomy - breast

Authors' Contributions

H.Y.J. was responsible for data collection, data interpretation, manuscript writing, and approval of the final version. T.K., H.P., K.E.K., S.B.N., J.Y.G. were responsible for data collection and data interpretation. S.H.B. was responsible for study conception and design, manuscript critical revisions, and approval of the final version.


Ethical Approval

The study was reviewed and approved by the Institutional Review Board of Pusan National University Hospital (IRB No. H-2211-019-121). Written informed consent was obtained from patient.


Patient Consent

Informed consent was obtained from the patient for publication.




Publikationsverlauf

Eingereicht: 31. Mai 2023

Angenommen: 22. September 2023

Accepted Manuscript online:
26. September 2023

Artikel online veröffentlicht:
07. Februar 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Lapid O. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy for gestational gigantomastia. Aesth Plast Surg 2013; 37 (02) 388-391
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Dancey A, Khan M, Dawson J, Peart F. Gigantomastia–a classification and review of the literature. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2008; 61 (05) 493-502
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Hassayoune N, Mhallem Gziri M, Lentini A. et al. Severe gestational gigantomastia: from mastectomy to staged autologous breast reconstruction. a case report. JPRAS Open 2021; 29: 65-70
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Mangla M, Singla D. Gestational gigantomastia: a systematic review of case reports. J Midlife Health 2017; 8 (01) 40-44
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Swelstad MR, Swelstad BB, Rao VK, Gutowski KA. Management of gestational gigantomastia. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118 (04) 840-848
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shoma A, Elbassiony L, Amin M. et al. “Gestational gigantomastia”: a review article and case presentation of a new surgical management option. Surg Innov 2011; 18 (01) 94-101
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Qin F, Si L, Zhang H. et al. Management of gestational gigantomastia with breast reconstruction after mastectomy: case report and literature review. J Int Med Res 2020; 48 (06) 300060520920463
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Karacor-Altuntas Z, Yildirim MEC, Findik S. A rare case of gestational gigantomastia. ANZ J Surg 2019; 89 (06) E282-E283
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rutherford CL, Hsieh MKH, Tan HM, Twoon M, Kong TY. A rare case of persistent unilateral gestational gigantomastia. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2019; 7 (08) e2372
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fletcher MB, Corsini LM, Meyer MD, Osswald SS. Gestational gigantomastia: a case report and brief review of the literature. JAAD Case Rep 2020; 6 (11) 1159-1161
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Wolf Y, Pauzner D, Groutz A, Walman I, David MP. Gigantomastia complicating pregnancy. Case report and review of the literature. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 1995; 74 (02) 159-163
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Mamouni N, Erraghay S, Oufkir A, Saadi H, Bouchikhi C, Banani A. La gigantomastie: à propos d'un cas et revue de la literature. Pan Afr Med J 2014; 18: 2-5
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Mahabbat N, Abdulla A, Alsufayan F. et al. Gestational gigantomastia on a Saudi woman: a case report on surgical removal and reconstruction and management of complications, KFSH&RC. Int J Surg Case Rep 2020; 77: 157-160 [Internet]
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Eler Dos Reis P, Blunck Santos NQ, Barbosa Pagio FA, Chambô F, Chambô D, Chambô Filho A. Management and follow-up of a case of gestational gigantomastia in a brazilian hospital. Case Rep Obstet Gynecol 2014; 2014 (12881813): 610363
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Becker H, Vazquez OA, Komberg J. Goldilocks procedure without a vertical incision and a comprehensive literature review. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2021; 9 (08) e3786
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Manrique OJ, Kuruoglu D, Yan M. et al. Immediate breast reconstruction using the Goldilocks procedure: a balance between more surgery and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2022; 149 (04) 801-809
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Schwartz J-C, Skowronski PP. Case report of a definitive autologous reconstruction in a patient requiring immediate postoperative anticoagulation and reduced operative time. Int J Surg Case Rep 2016; 25: 86-88
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Oliver JD, Chaudhry A, Vyas KS, Manrique OJ, Martinez-Jorge J. Aesthetic Goldilocks mastectomy and breast reconstruction: promoting its use in the ideal candidate. Gland Surg 2018; 7 (05) 493-495
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Chaudhry A, Oliver JD, Vyas KS, Alsubaie SA, Manrique OJ, Martinez-Jorge J. Outcomes analysis of Goldilocks mastectomy and breast reconstruction: single institution experience of 96 cases. J Surg Oncol 2019; 119 (08) 1047-1052
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar