Treatment outcome with radiation therapy after breast augmentation or reconstruction in patients with primary breast carcinoma

Breast Conserving Therapy for Patients With Prior Cosmetic Implant-Based Breast Augmentation: Outcomes and Comparison Against a Matched Cohort

INTRODUCTION

Controversy exists regarding potential increased toxic effects in patients with cosmetic implant-based augmentation (CIBA) who receive radiation therapy. We evaluated acute and chronic toxic effects associated with radiation therapy in women with prior CIBA treated with whole-breast irradiation (WBI) as part of breast conserving therapy (BCT) and compared these results against a cohort of patients without prior breast augmentation who received similar therapy.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed to identify patients with a prior history of CIBA who subsequently underwent BCT with WBI. The control group consisted of consecutively treated patients without prior CIBA who also underwent BCT with WBI. Analyses included a comparison of baseline and treatment-associated factors between the augmentation and control groups, evaluation of toxic effects between both groups, and multivariable analysis of factors associated with the receipt of additional surgery following radiation.

RESULTS

Thirty-six patients with prior CIBA and 135 consecutively treated patients without CIBA were identified. Patients with prior CIBA were treated from 2006 through 2019, and patients without CIBA were treated from 2016 through 2019, though treatment characteristics and median follow-up time were similar between the two groups. Patients with prior CIBA were significantly less likely to experience acute moist desquamation (0% vs. 18%; P = .005). There were otherwise no statistically significant differences in acute (≤ 6 months) or chronic (> 6 months) toxic effects between the two groups. Rates of excellent/good chronic cosmetic outcome were 89% for the CIBA group and 97% in the control group (P = .094). On multivariable analysis, patients without prior CIBA (OR = 0.04; CI = 0.01-0.13; P < .001) and patients treated with moderately hypofractionated irradiation (OR = 0.08; CI = 0.02-0.23; P < .001) were significantly less likely to undergo additional surgery following receipt of WBI. Two patients experienced implant loss following radiation therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

WBI as part of BCT in patients with prior implant-based breast augmentation appears safe and is associated with favorable cosmetic outcomes. There was an increased need for additional surgery in patients with prior CIBA, but rates of acute and chronic toxic effects appeared similar to those in nonaugmented patients.

Oncoplastic Augmentation Mastopexy in Breast Conservation Therapy: Retrospective Study and Postoperative Complications

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic techniques, in conjunction with lumpectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy, have been demonstrated to achieve good aesthetic results and cancer outcomes in the treatment of patients with macromastia or significant ptosis. This study evaluated a series of patients undergoing breast conservation with concomitant oncoplastic-augmentation-mastopexy and a contralateral augmentation-mastopexy.

METHODS

Patients undergoing lumpectomy for breast conservation were identified via a retrospective chart review. Inclusion criteria included patients with ptosis and preexisting breast implants or insufficient breast volume undergoing oncoplastic implant placement/exchange and mastopexy. Demographic characteristics, operative details, and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Thirty-four consecutive patients (64 breasts, 4 unilateral procedures) were included in the study. Average age was 51.4 years, average body mass index was 27, and 38.2% were smokers/former smokers. The average operative time was 2.5 hours. Furthermore, 38.2% of patients received chemotherapy, and 82.4% of patients received breast adjuvant radiotherapy. The average length of follow-up was 11.7 months. In the sample that received radiation, the capsular contracture rate was 25%, with a 7.1% contracture revision rate. For the entire group, a total of 8 patients (23.5%) underwent revisions for either positive margins (8.8%), capsular contracture (8.8%), implant loss (2.9%), or cosmetic concerns (2.9%). One patient developed a pulmonary embolism.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncoplastic-augmentation-mastopexy is a safe technique with acceptable complication rates. This technique is best used for breast cancer patients with breast ptosis and a paucity of breast volume or preexisting implants who wish to pursue breast-conserving therapy. The revision rates are acceptable compared with single-stage cosmetic augmentation procedures as well as other oncoplastic techniques described in the literature, but patients must be clearly counseled on contracture risk.

Breast-conserving therapy can be offered to women with prior breast augmentation

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer in women with cosmetic breast implants is increasingly common. Over the past decade, there has been a push for mastectomy and reconstruction in these patients, based on a fear of poor aesthetic results from small breast volume, and radiation-induced capsular contracture. At the Paris Breast Centre, augmented women routinely undergo lumpectomy with whole-breast irradiation (BCT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A consecutive cohort of 50 augmented women, who had attempted BCT for early breast cancer at our institution between 2003 and 2018, were retrospectively identified. Post-treatment complications, oncologic outcomes, capsular contracture rates, long-term cosmetic outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 51 months. Margins were involved in 7 women (14%); 4 of whom underwent successful re-excision, and 3 had a mastectomy, for an early mastectomy rate of 6%. There were no early complications, nor cases of early implant loss. Long-term aesthetic results were evaluated using our 5-point scale: An excellent (5), or good (4) result was obtained in 68%. Significant capsular contracture (Baker grade 3 or 4) developed in 34%, of which, 5 women underwent capsulotomy and fat grafting; 4 of 5 downstaging their Baker grade. The estimated 5-year local recurrence rate was 2.3%. Ninety-five percent of participants would recommend BCT to augmented women.

CONCLUSION

BCT is feasible and safe in augmented women with good long-term aesthetic results, and should be considered to avoid unnecessary mastectomy.

Capsular contracture in patients with prior breast augmentation undergoing breast conserving therapy and irradiation

Radiation is considered to be a risk factor for developing capsular contracture in augmented women, but the studies reporting on this subject show conflicting results. In this systematic review we sought to understand the risk of capsular contracture in augmented patients with breast cancer treated with breast conserving surgery and radiotherapy. A search was conducted through PubMed for studies reporting on breast cancer, breast augmentation and radiotherapy, with capsular contracture as our primary outcome. To determine if specific risk factors were significant predictors of the development of capsular contracture, we performed uni- and multivariate analysis. Our search revealed 136 articles, of which 12 were deemed eligible. A total of 237 patients were included in the analysis. Univariate analysis revealed that whole breast irradiation (WBI) was significantly associated with a higher risk of contracture (p < .001), compared to treatment with accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI). A higher radiotherapy dose regimen was also significantly associated with a risk of capsular contracture (p < .001). When performing the multivariate analysis only the effect of increasing radiation dose remained significant (p < .05). Neither the implant location nor the age of the implant had any significant effect on the development of contracture. In conclusion this review shows that WBI is associated with a higher risk of contracture compared to treatment with APBI. Because of the limitations of the studies included, further studies with larger patient cohorts are needed to establish this correlation and evaluate other potential risk factors.

Immediate Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction Failure: Radiation Is Not the Only Culprit

BACKGROUND

Immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction produces a satisfactory aesthetic result with high levels of patient satisfaction. However, with the broader indication for postmastectomy adjuvant radiation therapy, many patients are advised against immediate breast reconstruction because of concerns of implant loss and infection, particularly as most patients also require chemotherapy. This retrospective cohort study examines outcomes for patients who underwent immediate two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction after mastectomy with or without adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

METHODS

Between 1998 and 2010, 452 patients undergoing immediate two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction involving a total of 562 breasts were included in this study. Stage 1 was defined as insertion of the temporary expander, and stage 2 was defined as insertion of the final silicone implant. Postoperative adjuvant radiotherapy was recommended with a tissue expander in situ for 114 patients. Complications, including loss of prosthesis, seroma, and infection, were recorded and analyzed. Cosmetic result was assessed using a four-point scale.

RESULTS

Postoperative prosthesis loss was 2.7 percent, 5.3 percent for patients undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy and increasing to 11.3 percent for patients receiving chemotherapy plus radiotherapy. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy independently were the main, statistically significant risk factors for expander or implant loss [incidence rate ratio, 13.85 (p = 0.012) and 2.23 (p = 0.027), respectively]. Prosthesis loss for patients undergoing combination chemotherapy plus radiotherapy was also significant [incidence rate ratio, 4.791 (p < 0.001)].

CONCLUSIONS

These findings serve to better inform patients on risk in weighing treatment options. Postmastectomy radiation therapy doubles the risk of prosthesis loss over and above adjuvant chemotherapy but is an acceptable option following immediate two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction in a multidisciplinary setting.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Breast Cancer following Augmentation Mammaplasty: A Case-Control Study

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to determine whether augmentation mammaplasty, implant type, and implant location affect breast cancer detection, stage, and treatment.

METHODS

An institutional case-control study was performed of patients with prior breast augmentation undergoing breast cancer treatment from 2000 to 2013. Controls were propensity matched and randomized, and data were retrospectively reviewed.

RESULTS

Forty-eight cases and 302 controls were analyzed. Palpable lesions were detected at a smaller size in augmentation patients (1.6 cm versus 2.3 cm; p < 0.001). Fewer lesions in augmented patients were detected by screening mammography (77.8 percent of cases versus 90.7 percent of controls; p = 0.010). Patients with implants were more likely to undergo an excisional biopsy for diagnosis (20.5 percent versus 4.4 percent; p < 0.001), rather than image-guided core needle biopsy (77.3 percent versus 95.3 percent; p < 0.001). Earlier staging in augmented patients approached but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.073). Augmented patients had higher mastectomy rates (74.5 percent versus 57.0 percent) and lower rates of breast-conservation therapy (25.5 percent versus 43 percent; p = 0.023). Neither implant fill type nor anatomic location affected method of diagnosis, stage, or treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Palpable detection of breast cancer is more likely at a smaller size in augmented patients, yet it is less likely on screening mammography than in controls. Augmentation breast cancer patients have a comparable disease stage and are more likely to undergo mastectomy rather than lumpectomy. Both silicone and saline implants, whether placed submuscularly or subglandularly, have comparable effects on breast imaging, biopsy modality, and surgical intervention.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy with or without Prior Postmastectomy Radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction with initial insertion of a tissue expander followed by an implant after a period of inflation is a well-established breast reconstruction option. Most of the current literature concentrates on the immediate setting, and there are only a few reports into delayed cases, especially after postmastectomy radiotherapy (RT). We performed a retrospective review of our experience over a 12.5-year period.

METHODS

Between June 1998 and December 2010, a total of 671 patients received prosthetic-only breast reconstruction. Of these, 170 (25.3%) underwent delayed 2-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer. Patients were divided into group A, no postmastectomy RT (n = 150), and group B, postmastectomy RT (n = 20). The primary factor examined was the failure of the reconstruction from loss of prosthesis with or without smoking. Other complications, as well as rates of revisional surgery were also recorded.

RESULTS

Expander or implant loss occurred in 3 of 150 patients in group A (2.0%) and 3 of 20 patients in group B (15%; P = 0.02). For nonsmokers, implant loss was 1.6% and 5.6%, respectively (P = NS). Smoking was associated with 1 of the 3 losses in group A and 2 of the 3 in group B (smokers, n = 2; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in other complications such as seromas or minor wound infections.

CONCLUSIONS

Delayed 2-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction has a low failure rate. It can also be successfully completed in selected patients after postmastectomy RT, but care must be taken with patients who smoke.

Protection and measurement in radiation therapy

In radiation therapy, unlike most other applications involving radiation, the intention is to deliver high doses of radiation to diseased tissue, constrained by the effects of radiation to healthy tissue. With regard to patient exposure, the radiation protection framework of justification, optimization, and limitation is a direct part of the prescription process of radiation therapy. Staff and public exposures are typically far below occupational maximum permissible exposures. However, a number of other issues arise in radiation therapy that fall into the category of radiation protection. After an historical review, this paper discusses several contemporary and emerging concerns within radiation therapy, including fetal dose, secondary malignancies, and dose to implantable devices, all of which involve accurate dose assessment outside the intended treatment volume. Other concerns include quality and safety, molecularly based disease assessment and treatment, and other novel treatment strategies. The paper ends with a discussion of the interplay between best practices and regulatory oversight.

[Patient-reported outcome of their breast reconstruction after mastectomy]

BACKGROUND

The overall care of patients with breast cancer is a major public health issue. Breast reconstruction is a part of it, and could be modulated by factors related to their personal life or surgical management. The aim of our study was to investigate a statistical link between these factors of variability, and overall satisfaction after breast reconstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We evaluated in a retrospective study patients' satisfaction in Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery Department of the University Hospital, Poitiers, after breast reconstruction using different sources of variability: elements of life at the moment of reconstruction decision, reconstruction management and the feeling of involvement in decisions related to reconstruction. Satisfaction was quantified by modified BREAST-Q pre- and postoperative questionnaires ("reconstruction" module) complemented by an open question to address patients experience.

RESULTS

From January 2005 to May 2011, 148 patients underwent surgery, 60.1% accepted to complete the survey (89 patients). Postoperative overall satisfaction was 89.1 out of 100. Satisfaction gradually decreased (P=0.022), postoperative overall satisfaction was non-significantly higher with autologous reconstruction, regardless of the variability factor studied. Secondary reconstruction with autologous reconstruction enhanced physical well-being (P<0.001). Patients expressed a high request for information about the different kinds of reconstruction, postoperative, as well as support groups.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that patients are generally very satisfied, but do not explain the causes of dissatisfaction. It paves the way for development of satisfaction with breast reconstruction databases.

Does hyperbaric oxygen administration before or after irradiation decrease side effects of irradiation on implant sites?

BACKGROUND

One of the main limitations of implant-based breast reconstruction is the high rate of complications such as capsular contracture and poor aesthetic outcome, due to adjuvant radiotherapy. Hyperbaric oxygen treatment (HBOT) has been used to assist wound healing in the prevention and treatment of the side effects of irradiation. We aimed to investigate this effect of HBOT on the capsule reaction and skin, applied before and after irradiation, following the placement of an implant under the dorsal skin of the rat.

METHODS

Fifteen Wistar rats were randomly divided into 3 groups. A 18-mL smooth testicular implant was introduced into a subcutaneous pocket located on the dorsum of each rat. A single dose of 17-Gy irradiation was given to the implanted area of each rat at the third week. HBOT which lasted 3 weeks was administered to group I before irradiation, group II after irradiation. The control group did not receive HBOT. All of the rats were killed at the ninth week (6 weeks after irradiation). The dorsal skin with the capsule overlying the implant were excised for histopathological processing. The thickness of the capsule reaction of each group was evaluated statistically.

RESULTS

Our histopathological examination revealed changes due to radiation in the control group. Many of these findings were found to be more subtle in group I and nearly absent in the group II. There was not any statistical difference between the thickness of the capsule reactions of the control group and group I, or group I and group II, but the capsular thickness of the control group was statistically higher than group II.

CONCLUSION

It can be predicted that the use of HBOT following irradiation is an effective tool to reduce the capsule reaction of the implanted area and the tissue damage seen in radiodermatitis.

The Changing Face of Mastectomy (from Mutilation to Aid to Breast Reconstruction)

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. Primary treatment is surgery, with mastectomy as the main treatment for most of the twentieth century. However, over that time, the extent of the procedure varied, and less extensive mastectomies are employed today compared to those used in the past, as excessively mutilating procedures did not improve survival. Today, many women receive breast-conserving surgery, usually with radiotherapy to the residual breast, instead of mastectomy, as it has been shown to be as effective as mastectomy in early disease. The relatively new skin-sparing mastectomy, often with immediate breast reconstruction, improves aesthetic outcomes and is oncologically safe. Nipple-sparing mastectomy is newer and used increasingly, with better acceptance by patients, and again appears to be oncologically safe. Breast reconstruction is an important adjunct to mastectomy, as it has a positive psychological impact on the patient, contributing to improved quality of life.

Fibrotic changes after postmastectomy radiotherapy and reconstructive surgery in breast cancer. A retrospective analysis in 109 patients

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to analyze the probability and time course of fibrotic changes in breast reconstruction before or after postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Between 1995 and 2004, 109 patients were treated with PMRT at Tübingen University and underwent heterologous (HL) or autologous (AL) breast reconstruction prior or subsequent to radiation therapy. Fibrosis of the reconstructed breast after radiotherapy was assessed using the Baker score for HL reconstructions and the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) for all patients. Actuarial rates of fibrosis were calculated for the maximum degree acquired during follow- up and at the last follow-up visit documented.

RESULTS

Median time to follow-up was 34 months (3-227 months). Radiotherapy was applied with a median total dose of 50.4 Gy. A total of 44 patients (40.4%) received a boost treatment with a median dose of 10 Gy. Breast reconstruction was performed with AL, HL, or combined techniques in 20, 82, and 7 patients, respectively. The 3-year incidence of ≥ grade III maximum fibrosis was 20% and 43% for Baker and CTCAE scores, respectively. The corresponding figures for fibrosis at last follow-up visit were 18% and 2%. The 3-year rate of surgical correction of the contralateral breast was 30%. Initially unplanned surgery of the reconstructed breast was performed in 39 patients (35.8%). Boost treatment and type of cosmetic surgery (HL vs. AL) were not significantly associated with the incidence of fibrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

We found severe fibrosis to be a frequent complication after PMRT radiotherapy and breast reconstruction. However, surgical intervention can ameliorate the majority of high grade fibrotic events leading to acceptable long-term results. No treatment parameters associated with the rate of fibrosis could be identified.

A review of the surgical management of breast cancer: plastic reconstructive techniques and timing implications

The oncologic management of breast cancer has evolved over the past several decades from radical mastectomy to modern-day preservation of chest and breast structures. The increased rate of mastectomies over recent years made breast reconstruction an integral part of the breast cancer management. Plastic surgery now offers patients a wide variety of reconstruction options from primary closure of the skin flaps to performance of microvascular and autologous tissue transplantation. Well-coordinated partnerships between surgical oncologists, plastic surgeons, and patients address concerns of tumor control, cosmesis, and patients' wishes. The gamut of breast reconstruction options is reviewed, particularly noting state-of-the-art techniques, as well as the advantages and disadvantages of various timing modalities.

Breast cancer following augmentation mammoplasty - a review of its impact on prognosis and management

The incidence of breast cancer in women with implants is increasing and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future due to the marked increase in breast implant insertion in recent years. Undoubtedly many of these women will wish to know whether the presence of implants worsens the prognosis of their breast cancer. Furthermore, the clinical management of such patients may be difficult, as aesthetic results are likely to be a major concern for women who have already undergone cosmetic surgery to the breast. There is no consensus on surgical approach to this scenario. This article reviews the literature on the prognosis of breast cancer patients with a history of augmentation mammoplasty and examines the available data regarding their surgical treatment.

Breast Cancer in the Previously Augmented Breast

Breast cancer in a previously augmented breast raises questions regarding cancer detection and staging, surgical and adjuvant treatment options, reconstructive outcomes, management of the contralateral breast, and continued breast cancer surveillance. This article explores the oncologic and reconstructive issues relevant to women desiring cosmetic breast implants and women with breast cancer who have undergone prior cosmetic breast augmentation.

Breast reconstruction with alloplastic implants

This article reviews immediate and delayed breast reconstruction with prosthetic implants, and the effect of irradiation therapy. Despite widespread use of breast conserving surgery for early breast cancer, many breast cancer patients still undergo mastectomy. Some of these patients choose breast reconstruction. Over the last 30 years, techniques for breast reconstruction have evolved significantly with new alternative techniques and improved surgical devises. Immediate or delayed breast reconstruction with silicone prosthesis can be an excellent option. Implant reconstruction may be single or two stage procedures. Traditionally, small breasts with minimal ptosis are suited for single-stage reconstruction. Large breasts or inadequate skin require expanders followed by implants. Minimal excision mastectomy and biological spacers are allowing larger breast single stage reconstruction and improved aesthetics for two stage procedures. With recent studies suggesting survival advantage of post-mastectomy irradiation, many candidates for breast reconstruction are receiving radiotherapy, which complicates healing after breast reconstruction.

The influence of radiotherapy on capsule formation and aesthetic outcome after immediate breast reconstruction using biodimensional anatomical expander implants

BACKGROUND

Capsular contracture occurs more frequently when immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is associated with radiotherapy (RT) in a post-mastectomy field. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of RT on surgical outcome after IBR using a single implant type.

METHODS

One hundred and thirty-six breast reconstructions were studied in 114 patients: 62 reconstructions were performed using submuscular implants alone and 74 had an implant-assisted latissimus dorsi myocutaneous flap using a McGhan 150 biodimensional permanent expander implant. Data were prospectively collected on capsule contracture, geometric measurements, photographic assessments and pain scores. The median follow-up was 4 (range, 2-5) years.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 114 patients studied was 45 (range, 20-77) years. Forty-four reconstructed breasts received RT. Capsule formation was detected in 13/92 (14.1%) reconstructed breasts with no RT and in 17/44 (38.6%) reconstructed breasts with RT. On univariate analysis, RT was the only variable related to capsule formation (p<0.001). Significant differences in geometric measurements of symmetry were identified in patients with capsules compared with those without capsules. Photographic assessments were worse in the capsule group: mean photo score 8 (95% CI 8, 8.5) compared with the no capsule group 6.5 (95% CI 5, 7.5), p<0.001. Persistent pain two years or more after surgery was present in 8/30 patients with capsules and 1/106 with no capsule group, p<0.01. Capsule formation is three times more likely to occur after IBR in association with an RT field. However, as more than 60% of patients do not get capsules despite RT at four years, implant-assisted tissue expansion techniques using a biodimensional device is a viable breast reconstructive option in selected cases.

Skin-sparing mastectomy

Background

Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) is a new technique being used in a variety of clinical settings. This article reviews the published data on SSM to establish its current role in clinical practice.

Methods

A Medline search was carried out using the key words ‘skin-sparing mastectomy’ to identify English-language articles published between 1990 and 2004 and further material referenced in these publications.

Results

SSM is most commonly used for surgical prophylaxis and to treat in situ and early invasive disease in patients who request immediate breast reconstruction. SSM and non-SSM result in similar surgical and oncological outcomes, but skin flap ischaemia is more common after SSM and is associated with a range of risk factors, including smoking.

Conclusion

SSM has become an established procedure in breast surgery, but there is a lack of prospective data on which to make evidence-based decisions about its use in individual patients.

Unilateral Postoperative Chest Wall Radiotherapy in Bilateral Tissue Expander/Implant Reconstruction Patients: A Prospective Outcomes Analysis

BACKGROUND

Implant reconstruction has a major role to play in breast reconstruction, as some patients neither wish nor are suitable for autogenous reconstruction. The suitability of implant reconstruction in patients who may receive postoperative, adjuvant radiation therapy has not, however, been fully clarified. The purpose of this study was to evaluate complications, capsular contracture, aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction in patients who have undergone bilateral tissue expander/implant reconstruction and unilateral, post exchange, adjuvant radiotherapy. In this study population, the effect of radiation can best be appreciated because the nonirradiated breast acts as a control.

METHODS

A review of all bilateral tissue expander/implant reconstructions at a single cancer center was undertaken. Twelve patients who underwent bilateral expander/implant reconstruction and unilateral postexchange radiotherapy were eligible for participation. A prospective evaluation of complications, cosmesis, and patient satisfaction was performed. The evaluation of cosmesis and patient satisfaction was executed for 10 of the 12 patients, as two were dead at the time of follow-up.

RESULTS

Mean follow-up was 23.5 months (range, 12 to 58.5 years). In 40 percent of patients, there was no discernible difference in capsular contracture between the irradiated and nonirradiated breasts. In 50 percent of patients, the irradiated breast demonstrated increased contracture by a single modified Baker grade. In 10 percent of patients, contracture of the irradiated breast was two modified Baker grades greater than that of the nonirradiated side (grade III versus grade I).

CONCLUSION

For the majority of patients, the degree of capsular contracture was higher on the irradiated side, yet overall symmetry, aesthetic results, and patient satisfaction remained high. These data support the conclusion that immediate, bilateral breast reconstruction using tissue expansion and implants is an acceptable option for the subset of patients who may undergo unilateral, postexchange radiotherapy.

Reconstruction mammaire par prothèse : vieillissement et résultats esthétiques tardifs

The long cosmetic outcome of breast implant reconstruction is unknown. The morbidity and cosmetic outcome of 360 patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with various types of implant has been prospectively analysed over a 10-year period. 334 patients who completed their reconstruction were suitable for evaluation of their cosmetic outcome. The early complication rate (<2 months) was 9.1%, with an explantation rate of 1.6%. The late complication rate (>2 months) was 23%, with a pathological capsular contracture rate of 11% at two years and 15% at five years, and an implant removal rate of 7%. The revisional surgery rate was 30.2%. The cosmetic results were prospectively assessed using an objective five point global scale. Every patient was scored at each visit once surgery was completed. The overall cosmetic outcome deteriorates in a linear fashion from an initial acceptable result in 86% of patients two years after completion of their reconstruction to only 54% at five years. This fall off in the cosmetic outcome was not associated with the type of implant used, the volume of the implant, the age of the patient or the type of mastectomy incision employed. Radiotherapy was not a significant factor as only 28 patients were irradiated. However, on Cox model analysis pathological capsular contracture was the only factor which significantly contributed to a poor cosmetic outcome(P<0.0001 (relative risk 6.3). In spite of a high revisional surgery rate, deterioration still occurred, suggesting that other unaccounted for variables were responsible. On photographic retrospective review of those patients without a capsular contracture who demonstrated a deterioration in their cosmetic scores, it became clear that a possible reason for their poor result was late asymmetry produced by the failure of both breasts to undergo symmetrical ptosis as the patients aged.

Oncological aspects of breast reconstruction

Breast reconstruction has become increasingly popular over the past 20 years. There is concern that it may mask locoregional recurrence or that immediate reconstruction may compromise adjuvant treatments. We review available evidence regarding its oncological safety. The literature consists almost entirely of single institution, small retrospective reviews with variable follow-up and varying conclusions. Most reviews suggest that breast reconstruction does not adversely affect disease-free or overall survival and that there is no significant delay in presentation with recurrent disease. Three retrospective series compared chemotherapy delivery after immediate breast reconstruction with controls having mastectomy alone. No delay in chemotherapy delivery or effect on dose intensity was demonstrated. Irradiation of a prosthetic implant has been shown to increase the rate of capsular contracture; irradiation of autogenous tissue reconstruction is usually well tolerated.

Radiotherapy for breast cancer in patients undergoing breast reconstruction or augmentation

Due to increasing indications for postmastectomy radiotherapy and a growing demand for breast reconstruction or augmentation, increasing numbers of patients are currently being exposed to both these treatments. In view of the wide range of available techniques for breast reconstruction, either prosthetic or autologous, and their various sequencing in relation to radiotherapy, physicians can be faced with numerous clinical situations requiring comprehensive knowledge of the topic. This review discusses physical, radiobiological and clinical aspects of combining breast reconstruction and radiotherapy. The available data indicate the feasibility of such combinations, although at the expense of increased risk of complications and less satisfactory cosmesis. Of the two methods of breast reconstruction: using autologous tissue or prosthesis, the former seems to provide better cosmesis and a lower risk of complications in conjunction with radiotherapy. To minimize the risk of unfavourable outcome, the techniques and timing of both breast reconstruction and radiotherapy should be given meticulous attention.

Local???Regional Radiation Therapy After Breast Reconstruction: What Is the Appropriate Target Volume?

The oncologic safety and cosmetic outcome of immediate breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients requiring radiation therapy remains ill-defined. Between 1980 and 1998, 18 patients were treated at the University of Utah Medical Center with mastectomy, immediate breast reconstruction, and adjuvant radiation therapy delivered via an electron arc technique. A case-control study was performed matching reconstructed patients in a 1:2 ratio with patients undergoing mastectomy without reconstruction, using number of lymph nodes and tumor size. Median follow-up was 61 months for the reconstructed group. Five-year local-regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates were 87%, 58%, and 74% respectively in the reconstructed group, versus 88%, 57%, and 67% respectively in the matched control group. Cosmesis was good/excellent in 11 of 13 living patients (85%). Significant capsular contraction occurred in 18% of prosthetic reconstruction patients, and revisional surgery was required in 24% of prosthetic reconstruction patients. Utilizing the electron arc technique, the median radiation dose to the chest wall at the midlevel of the ribs was 20% of the prescribed dose, and no patient failed deep to the implant. These results suggest that in appropriately selected patients, structures deep to the reconstruction are not at high risk for local-regional recurrence, and immediate breast reconstruction yields comparable local-regional control, disease-free survival, and overall survival rates to nonreconstructed patients, with acceptable cosmetic results.

Breast-conserving therapy and sentinel lymph node biopsy are feasible in cancer patients with previous implant breast augmentation

BACKGROUND

Breast-conserving therapy (BCT) is reported to result in a significant rate of complications and local recurrences in patients with prior implant breast augmentation. The role of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in these patients is unknown.

METHODS

Retrospective review of patients with prior breast augmentation treated with BCT or SLN biopsy.

RESULTS

Nineteen breast cancers were treated with BCT. Of 17 breasts undergoing adjuvant radiotherapy, 11 (64.7%) retained favorable aesthetic results. Of 9 subpectoral implants, capsular contracture developed in only 1 (11.1%). During follow-up (median 3 years), 1 local recurrence (5.3%) occurred in a patient who refused adjuvant radiotherapy and systemic therapy. Eleven patients underwent SLN biopsy with an identification rate of 100% and a false-negative rate of 0%.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast-conserving therapy inclusive of radiotherapy after implant breast augmentation produced acceptable cosmetic results in nearly two-thirds of patients. Sentinel lymph node mapping in the setting of prior implant augmentation was highly successful and accurate.

Acute and Chronic Results of Adjuvant Radiotherapy After Mastectomy and Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous (TRAM) Flap Reconstruction for Breast Cancer

A retrospective review of the treatment of 15 breast cancer patients who received postoperative radiotherapy after a mastectomy and transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap breast reconstruction was undertaken to determine the effects of postoperative irradiation on flap viability and cosmesis. Fourteen patients had pedicle TRAM flaps, and one patient had a free TRAM flap. Surgical complications, acute and chronic side effects of radiotherapy, and cosmetic outcome were evaluated. The median interval between the TRAM flap procedure and radiotherapy was 7 months. The median total radiation dose was 60 Gy. All patients underwent three-dimensional radiotherapy treatment planning to determine the optimal dose distribution. Mild erythema developed in 9 patients (60%), moderate erythema developed in 2 (13%), and severe erythema developed in 1 (7%). Dry desquamation developed in 6 patients (40%), whereas moist desquamation developed in none. At median follow-up of 26.4 months, only 2 (13%) of the 15 patients had fat necrosis within the TRAM flap that was not present before radiotherapy. Fourteen patients (93%) retained their flap, and 13 patients (87%) rated their cosmetic outcome as "good" to "excellent." We conclude that TRAM flaps can be irradiated with few complications and acceptable cosmetic results.

Low complication rates are achievable after postmastectomy breast reconstruction and radiation therapy

PURPOSE

To report our institution's experience of complications and cosmetic results among patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy followed by reconstruction and radiation therapy (RT).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Between 1987 and 2002, 85 patients with breast cancer underwent modified radical mastectomy, breast reconstruction, and postoperative RT. Reconstruction consisted of tissue expander/implant (TE/I) in 50 patients and an autologous transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap in 35 patients. The primary end point of this study was the actuarial incidence of major and minor complications involving the reconstruction. Cosmesis was also assessed at each follow-up visit.

RESULTS

The median follow-up from reconstruction was 28 months. The 5-year major complication rate was 0% in the TRAM group vs. 5% in the TE/I group (p = 0.21). The 5-year minor complication rate was 39% for the TRAM group vs. 14% for the TE/I group (p = 0.04). None (0%) of the TRAM complications required any corrective surgery, whereas 2 (33%) of the TE/I complications required implant removal. Of the TRAM patients with complications, 100% had superior cosmetic scores of excellent/good compared to only 17% of the TE/I patients who had complications (p = 0.003). Use of our custom-fashioned bolus resulted in a lower complication rate compared with standard bolus (p = 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients treated with breast reconstruction and RT can experience a very low rate of major complications. We demonstrate no significant difference in the overall rate of major complications between TRAM and TE/I patients. Bolus can be safely used during postmastectomy RT with reconstruction, and we advocate the use of a custom wax bolus in the treatment of these patients. Postmastectomy RT should be considered in all eligible patients, even in the setting of reconstruction.

Reconstructions mammaires après mastectomie pour cancer du sein : quelles indications retenir ?

Post-mastectomy breast reconstruction represents a surgical option that may improve psychosocial outcome without modifying patients' survival. Psychosocial impact of used surgical technique and moment of realization of breast reconstruction remains unclear. However, complications are negatively related to patients' satisfaction. There is no guideline for BR indications. Therefore, a review of clinical and cosmetic outcomes of different breast reconstruction modalities was necessary. It permitted to propose a shared decision-making algorithm for the choice of moment and technique of BR according to the presence of radiotherapy that appears to be the main risk factor of clinical outcome of breast reconstruction. It also disclosed some limits in information reliability about clinical outcome of particular associations of breast reconstruction and radiotherapy. Proportion of women pursuing breast reconstruction, and particularly immediate breast reconstruction, is rising. Clinical surveys assessing relation between radiotherapy and clinical and psychosocial outcome of breast reconstruction are urgently expected.

Dosimetry around metallic ports in tissue expanders in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy: an ex vivo evaluation

Postmastectomy breast reconstruction can be accomplished utilizing tissue expanders and implants. However, in patients who require postoperative radiotherapy, the complication rate with tissue expander/implant reconstruction can exceed 50%. One potential cause of this high complication rate may be the metallic port in the tissue expander producing altered dosimetry in the region of the metallic device. The purpose of this study was to quantify the radiation dose distribution in the vicinity of the metallic port and determine its potential contribution to this extremely high complication rate. The absolute dosimetric effect of the tissue expander's metallic port was quantified using film and thermoluminescent dosimetry (TLD) studies with a single beam incident on a metallic port extracted from an expander. TLD measurements were performed at 11 reproducible positions on an intact expander irradiated with tangential fields. A computed tomography (CT)-based treatment plan without inhomogeneity corrections was used to derive expected doses for all TLD positions. Multiple irradiation experiments were performed for all TLD data. Confidence intervals for the dose at TLD sites with the metallic port in place were compared to the expected dose at the site without the metallic port. Film studies did not reveal a significant component of scatter around the metallic port. TLD studies of the extracted metallic port revealed highest doses within the casing of the metallic port and no consistent increased dose at the surface of the expander. No excess dose due to the metallic port in the expander was noted with the phantom TLD data. Based upon these results, it does not appear that the metallic port in tissue expanders significantly contributes to the high complication rate experienced in patients undergoing tissue expander breast reconstruction and receiving radiation therapy. Strategies designed to reduce the breast reconstruction complication rate in this clinical setting will need to focus on factors other than adjusting the dosimetry around the tissue expander metallic port.

Postmastectomy Radiation in Patients with Four or More Positive Nodes

Postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMR), a local therapeutic modality, is recommended to treat breast cancer patients with multiple involved axillary lymph nodes (a marker of increased systemic risk). Bothered by this conceptually flawed treatment approach we evaluated the impact of PMR on the treatment of women with four or more involved axillary lymph nodes. We identified 1164 patients treated from 1982 through 1999 with mastectomy. We reviewed the records of the 223 who demonstrated four or more positive axillary lymph nodes. Of these 128 were treated by mastectomy only and 95 by PMR. The mastectomy-only group demonstrated a mean tumor size of 3.5 cm, a median of seven axillary nodes involved, and a median of 24.9 nodes harvested. The PMR group had a mean tumor size of 4.3 cm with nine positive nodes out of a median total of 23.3 harvested. The difference in mean tumor size was statistically significant ( P = 0.01). The locoregional recurrence (10.9% vs 12.6%), distant recurrence rates (42.2% vs 35.8%), and 5-year survival (51% vs 55%) were not statistically different between the mastectomy-only group versus the PMR group, respectively. Adding PMR to breast cancer treatment demonstrated no improvement in outcome. Despite limitations of this retrospective study the results strongly support evaluation of PMR by a high-quality randomized prospective trial.

Outcome with Postmastectomy Radiation with Transverse Rectus Abdominis Musculocutaneous Flap Breast Reconstruction

The effects of radiation on the outcome of patients undergoing transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM) flap breast reconstruction have not been extensively studied. Concern still exists of a possible negative impact secondary to irradiation as related to control of disease, cosmetic outcome, and flap viability. Thirty-six patients underwent both a modified radical mastectomy (MRM) with TRAM flap reconstruction and irradiation to the chest wall to include the TRAM flap and/or regional nodes either before reconstruction or after TRAM flap reconstruction. Fifteen patients had all of their treatment and follow-up at our institution and were retrospectively reviewed to assess treatment and outcome. During a median follow-up of 36 months there were no local-regional failures. One patient at Stage IIIA failed with distant metastases 3 years after treatment. One patient had a flap loss from a nonhealing wound after reconstruction performed 2 years after MRM and radiotherapy. Only one patient expressed dissatisfaction with the cosmetic outcome. Patients undergoing MRM with TRAM flap reconstruction and irradiation before or after reconstruction can achieve excellent local-regional control and satisfactory cosmesis. Risk of flap loss is low. Further follow-up is needed for assessing longer-term outomes in this patient group. Larger prospective studies are necessary for more definitive conclusions.

Prospective evaluation of late cosmetic results following breast reconstruction: I. Implant reconstruction

The long-term cosmetic outcome of breast implant reconstruction is unknown. The morbidity and cosmetic outcome of 360 patients who underwent immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction with various types of implants have been analyzed prospectively over a 9-year period. Of these patients, 334 who completed their reconstruction were suitable for evaluation of their cosmetic outcome. The early complication rate (< 2 months) was 9.2 percent, with an explantation rate of 1.7 percent. The late complication rate (> 2 months) was 23 percent, with a pathological capsular contracture rate of 11 percent at 2 years and 15 percent at 5 years and an implant removal rate of 7 percent. The revisional surgery rate was 30.2 percent. The cosmetic results were assessed prospectively using an objective five-point global scale. Every patient was scored at each visit once surgery was completed. The overall cosmetic outcome deteriorated in a linear fashion, from an initial acceptable result of 86 percent 2 years after patients completed their reconstruction to only 54 percent at 5 years. This decline in cosmetic outcome was not associated with the type of implant used, the volume of the implant, the age of the patient, or the type of mastectomy incision employed. Radiotherapy was not a significant factor because only 28 patients were irradiated. Upon Cox model analysis, pathological capsular contracture was the only factor that contributed significantly to a poor cosmetic outcome in which p < 0.0001 (relative risk 6.3). Despite a high revisional surgery rate, deterioration still occurred, suggesting that other unaccounted for variables were responsible. On photographic retrospective review of the patients without capsular contracture who demonstrated deterioration in their cosmetic scores, it became clear that a possible reason for their poor results was late asymmetry produced by the failure of both breasts to undergo symmetrical ptosis with aging.

Breast cancer after augmentation mammaplasty: treatment by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction

Breast conservation has been associated with poor cosmetic outcome when used to treat breast cancer in patients who have undergone prior augmentation mammaplasty. Radiation therapy of the augmented breast can increase breast fibrosis and capsular contraction. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction are examined as an alternative treatment.Six patients with prior breast augmentation were treated for breast cancer by skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. One patient underwent a contralateral prophylactic skin-sparing mastectomy. Silicone gel implants had been placed in the submuscular location in five patients and in the subglandular position in one patient a mean of 10.2 years (range, 6 to 20 years) before breast cancer diagnosis. The mean patient age was 41.3 years (range, 33 to 56 years). Four independent judges reviewed postoperative photographs to grade the aesthetic results in comparison with the opposite native or reconstructed breast. The American Joint Committee on Cancer staging was stage 0 in one patient, stage I for four patients, and stage II for one patient. Five of the six patients presented with a palpable breast mass. Latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction was performed in four patients (bilaterally in one) and a transverse rectus abdominis muscle (TRAM) flap was used in two patients. Three patients were treated by skin-sparing mastectomy with preservation of the breast implant (two patients with latissimus flaps, and one patient with a TRAM flap). The tumor location necessitated the removal of implants in two patients (one patient with a latissimus flap and one with a TRAM. A saline implant was placed under the latissimus flap after gel implant removal. The patient who underwent bilateral skin-sparing mastectomies desired explantation and placement of saline implants. No remedial surgery was performed on the opposite breast to achieve symmetry. Complications occurred in two patients at the latissimus dorsi donor site (seroma in one patient, and seroma and infection in one). Five patients underwent complete nipple reconstructions. The mean duration of follow-up was 33.6 months (range, 15.5 to 70.3 months), and there were no recurrences of breast cancer. The aesthetic results were judged to be good to excellent in all cases.Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction can be used in patients with prior breast augmentation, with good to excellent cosmetic results. Depending on the tumor and implant location, the implant may be preserved without compromising local control.

Complications and patient satisfaction following expander/implant breast reconstruction with and without radiotherapy

PURPOSE

To compare the rates of complications and patient satisfaction among breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy and tissue expander/implant reconstruction with and without radiotherapy.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

As part of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study (MBROS), breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction were prospectively evaluated with respect to complications, general patient satisfaction with reconstruction, and esthetic satisfaction. Included in this study was a cohort of women who underwent breast reconstruction using an expander/implant (E/I). A subset of these patients also received radiotherapy (RT). At 1 and 2 years postoperatively, a survey was administered which included 7 items assessing both general satisfaction with their reconstruction and esthetic satisfaction. Complication data were also obtained at the same time points using hospital chart review. Radiotherapy patients identified in the University of Michigan Radiation Oncology database that underwent expander/implant reconstruction but not enrolled in the MBROS study were also added to the analysis.

RESULTS

Eighty-one patients underwent mastectomy and E/I reconstruction. Nineteen patients received RT and 62 underwent reconstruction without RT. The median dose delivered to the reconstructed breast/chest wall, including boost, was 60.4 Gy (range, 50.0-66.0 Gy) in 1.8- to 2.0-Gy fractions. With a median follow-up of 31 months from the date of surgery, complications occurred in 68% (13/19) of the RT patients compared to 31% (19/62) in the no RT group (p = 0.006). Twelve of 81 patients (15%) had a breast reconstruction failure. Reconstruction failure was significantly associated with experiencing a complication (p = 0.0001) and the use of radiotherapy (p = 0.005). The observed reconstruction failure rates were 37% (7/19) and 8% (5/62) for patients treated with and without radiotherapy, respectively. Tamoxifen was associated with a borderline risk of complications (p = 0.07) and a significant risk of reconstruction failure (p = 0.01). Sixty-six patients of the study group completed the satisfaction survey; 15 patients did not. To offset potential bias for patients not completing the survey, we analyzed satisfaction data assuming "dissatisfaction" scores for surveys not completed. In the analysis of patients with unilateral E/I placement, reconstruction failure was significantly associated with a lower general satisfaction (p = 0.03). Ten percent of patients experiencing a reconstruction failure were generally satisfied compared to 23% who completed E/I reconstruction. In addition, tamoxifen use was associated with a significantly decreased esthetic satisfaction (p = 0.03). Radiotherapy was not associated with significantly decreased general or esthetic satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

Irradiated patients had a higher rate of expander/implant reconstruction failure and complications than nonirradiated patients. Despite these differences, our pilot data suggest that both general satisfaction and patient esthetic satisfaction were not significantly different following radiotherapy compared to patients who did not receive RT. Although statistical power was limited in the present study and larger patient numbers are needed to validate these results, this study suggests comparable patient assessment of cosmetic outcome with or without radiotherapy in women who successfully complete expander/implant reconstruction.

Postmastectomy radiotherapy: clinical practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology

OBJECTIVE

To determine indications for the use of postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) for patients with invasive breast cancer with involved axillary lymph nodes or locally advanced disease who receive systemic therapy. These guidelines are intended for use in the care of patients outside of clinical trials.

POTENTIAL INTERVENTION

The benefits and risks of PMRT in such patients, as well as subgroups of these patients, were considered. The details of the PMRT technique were also evaluated.

OUTCOMES

The outcomes considered included freedom from local-regional recurrence, survival (disease-free and overall), and long-term toxicity.

EVIDENCE

An expert multidisciplinary panel reviewed pertinent information from the published literature through July 2000; certain investigators were contacted for more recent and, in some cases, unpublished information. A computerized search was performed of MEDLINE data; directed searches based on the bibliographies of primary articles were also performed.

VALUES

Levels of evidence and guideline grades were assigned by the Panel using standard criteria. A "recommendation" was made when level I or II evidence was available and there was consensus as to its meaning. A "suggestion" was made based on level III, IV, or V evidence and there was consensus as to its meaning. Areas of clinical importance were pointed out where guidelines could not be formulated due to insufficient evidence or lack of consensus.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The recommendations, suggestions, and expert opinions of the Panel are described in this article.

VALIDATION

Seven outside reviewers, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Health Services Research Committee members, and the ASCO Board of Directors reviewed this document.

Immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer

BACKGROUND

Immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy has increased over the past decade following the unequivocal demonstration of its oncological safety and the availability of reliable methods of reconstruction. Broadly, it is undertaken in the treatment of breast cancer, after prophylactic mastectomy in high-risk patients, and in the management of treatment failure after breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy. Immediate breast reconstruction can be achieved reliably with a variety of autogenous tissue techniques or prosthetic devices. Careful discussion and evaluation remain vital in choosing the correct technique for the individual patient.

METHODS

This review is based primarily on an English language Medline search with secondary references obtained from key articles.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Immediate breast reconstruction is a safe and acceptable procedure after mastectomy for cancer; there is no evidence that it has untoward oncological consequences. In the appropriate patient it can be achieved effectively with either prosthetic or autogenous tissue reconstruction. Patient selection is important in order to optimize results, minimize complications and improve quality of life, while simultaneously treating the malignancy. Close cooperation and collaboration between the oncological breast and reconstructive surgeons is desirable in order to achieve these objectives.