Method of breast reconstruction and the development of lymphoedema

Implants versus autologous tissue flaps for breast reconstruction following mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Women who have a mastectomy for breast cancer treatment or risk reduction may be offered different options for breast reconstruction, including use of implants or the woman's own tissue (autologous tissue flaps). The choice of technique depends on factors such as the woman's preferences, breast characteristics, preoperative imaging, comorbidities, smoking habits, prior chest or breast irradiation, and planned adjuvant therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of implants versus autologous tissue flaps for postmastectomy breast reconstruction on women's quality of life, satisfaction, and short- and long-term surgical complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registries in July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that compared implant-based reconstruction with autologous tissue-based reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer treatment or risk reduction. The minimum eligible sample size was 100 participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data using standard Cochrane procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five non-randomised studies with 57,555 participants met our inclusion criteria. There were nine prospective cohort studies and 26 retrospective cohort studies. We judged 26 studies at serious overall risk of bias and the remaining studies at moderate overall risk of bias. Some studies measured quality of life and satisfaction using the BREAST-Q (scale of 0 to 100, higher is better). Implants may reduce postoperative psychosocial well-being compared with autologous tissue flaps (mean difference (MD) -4.26 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.91 to -3.61; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce or have little to no effect on postoperative physical well-being compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -1.92 points, 95% CI -4.44 to 0.60; I² = 87%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce postoperative sexual well-being compared with autologous reconstruction (MD -6.63 points, 95% CI -7.55 to -5.72; I² = 0; 6 studies, 3335 participants; low-certainty evidence). Women who undergo breast reconstruction with implants versus autologous tissue flaps may be less satisfied with the breast, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -8.17 points, 95% CI -11.41 to -4.92; I² = 90%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This outcome refers to a woman's satisfaction with breast size, bra fit, appearance in the mirror (clothed or unclothed), and how the breast feels to touch. Women who undergo breast reconstruction with implants versus autologous tissue flaps may be less satisfied with the reconstruction (MD -5.96 points, 95% CI -10.24 to -1.68; I² = 62%; 4 studies, 1196 participants; low-certainty evidence). This outcome refers to whether the aesthetic outcome has met the woman's expectations, the impact surgery has had on her life, and whether she thinks she made the right decision to have the reconstruction. Implants may reduce or have little to no effect on the risk of short-term complications compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03; I² = 91%; 22 studies, 34,244 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may increase long-term complications compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.22; I² = 94%; 17 studies, 26,930 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may have little to no effect on the need for reintervention compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.68; I² = 93%; 15 studies, 14,171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce the duration of surgery compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -125.04 minutes, 95% CI -131.41 to -118.67; I² = 0; 2 studies, 836 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review show that autologous tissue-based reconstruction compared with implant-based reconstruction may improve participant-reported outcomes such as psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and satisfaction with the reconstruction. There is also very uncertain evidence to suggest that autologous tissue-based reconstruction increases satisfaction with the breast and reduces the risk of long-term complications compared with implants. Implant-based reconstruction may be a shorter procedure, but the evidence is very uncertain. Despite the growing demand for breast reconstruction, the best technique has not been adequately studied in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the evidence provided by non-randomised studies is often unsatisfactory. There is no superior breast reconstruction technique for all women. Future research should focus on the definition of decisional drivers to guide an evidence-based shared decision-making process in reconstructive breast surgery.

Breast cancer-related lymphedema: A comprehensive analysis of risk factors

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer-related lymphedema is a devastating condition that negatively affects the quality of life of breast cancer survivors. We sought to identify risk factors that predicted the timing and development of lymphedema.

METHODS

Women with breast cancer that underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) at our institution between 2007 and 2022 were identified and sociodemographic and clinical information was extracted. We used logistic regression analysis to identify risk factors for lymphedema and performed cox-regression analysis to predict the timing of lymphedema presentation after surgery.

RESULTS

We identified 1,223 patients, of which 161 (13.2%) developed lymphedema within 1.8 (mean, SD = 2.5) years postoperatively. Patients with SLNB had significantly lower odds for lymphedema development (vs. ALND, OR = 0.29 [0.14-0.57]). Patients between 40 and 49 years of age, and 50-59 (vs. <40 years, OR = 2.14 [1.00-4.60]; OR = 2.42, [1.13-5.16] respectively), African American patients (vs. Caucasian, OR = 1.86 [1.12-3.09]), patients with stage II, III, and IV disease (vs. stage 0, OR = 3.75 [1.36-10.33]; OR = 6.62 [2.14-20.51]; OR = 9.36 [2.94-29.81]), and patients with Medicaid (vs. private insurance, OR = 3.56 [1.73-7.28]) had higher rates of lymphedema. Cox-regression analysis showed that African American (HR = 1.71 [1.08-2.70]), higher BMI (HR = 1.03 [1.00-1.06]), higher stage (stage II, HR = 2.22 [1.05-7.09]; stage III, HR = 5.26 [1.86-14.88]; stage IV, HR = 6.13 [2.12-17.75]), and Medicaid patients (HR = 2.15 [1.12-3.80]) had higher hazards for lymphedema. Patients with SLNB had lower hazards for lymphedema (HR = 0.43 [0.87-2.11]).

CONCLUSION

Lymphedema has identifiable risk factors that can reliably be used to predict the chances of lymphedema development and enable clinicians to educate patients better and formulate treatment plans accordingly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III (Retrospective study).

Association of the breast reconstruction modality with the development of postmastectomy lymphedema: A long-term follow-up study

BACKGROUND

Whether the breast reconstruction modality could influence the long-term development of post-mastectomy lymphedema has been little investigated. The present study aimed to evaluate the potential association of the breast reconstruction method with the incidence of lymphedema over an extended follow-up period.

METHODS

Patients with breast cancer who underwent immediate reconstruction from 2008 to 2014 were reviewed. They were categorized into three groups according to the reconstruction method: tissue expander/implant, abdominal flaps, and latissimus dorsi (LD) muscle flaps. Differences in the cumulative incidence of lymphedema by the reconstruction method were analyzed, as well as their independent influence on the outcome. Further analyses were conducted with propensity-score matching for baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

In total, 664 cases were analyzed with a median follow-up of 83 months (402 prostheses, 180 abdominal flaps, and 82 LD flaps). The rate of axillary lymph node dissection was significantly higher in the LD flap group than in the other two groups. The 5-year cumulative incidences of lymphedema in the LD flap, abdominal flap, and prosthesis groups were 3.7%, 10.6%, and 10.9%, respectively. In multivariable analyses, compared to the use of the LD flap, that of tissue expander/implant and that of abdominal flaps were associated with increased risks of lymphedema. A similar association was observed in the propensity-score matching analysis. The use of abdominal flaps or prostheses was not associated with the outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that the method of immediate breast reconstruction might be associated with the development of postmastectomy lymphedema.

Risk factors of unilateral breast cancer-related lymphedema: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis of 84 cohort studies

PURPOSE

To review and update the incidence and risk factors for breast cancer-related lymphedema based on cohort studies.

METHODS

The study was guided by the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology and the Cochrane handbook for systematic reviews. PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, Scopus, Web of Science, The Cochrane Library, CNKI, SinoMed, and Wan Fang Database were searched from inception to November 15, 2021. Cohort studies reported adjusted risk factors were selected. PRISMA guideline was followed. Study quality were evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Random-effects models were adopted. The robustness of pooled estimates was validated by meta-regression and subgroup analysis. Lymphedema incidence and adjusted risk factors in the multivariable analyses with hazard / odds ratios and 95% CIs were recorded.

RESULTS

Eighty-four cohort studies involving 58,358 breast cancer patients were included. The pooled incidence of lymphedema was 21.9% (95% CI, 19.8-24.0%). Fourteen factors were identified including ethnicity (black vs. white), higher body mass index, higher weight increase, hypertension, higher cancer stage (III vs. I-II), larger tumor size, mastectomy (vs. breast conservation surgery), axillary lymph nodes dissection, more lymph nodes dissected, higher level of lymph nodes dissection, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, surgery complications, and higher relative volume increase postoperatively. Additionally, breast reconstruction surgery, and adequate finance were found to play a protective role. However, other variables such as age, number of positive lymph nodes, and exercise were not correlated with risk of lymphedema.

CONCLUSION

Treatment-related factors still leading the development of breast cancer-related lymphedema. Other factors such as postoperative weight increase and finance status also play a part. Our findings suggest the need to shift the focus from treatment-related factors to modifiable psycho-social-behavioral factors.

Implant-based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Women undergoing implant-based reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy for breast cancer have numerous options, including timing of IBR relative to radiation and chemotherapy, implant materials, anatomic planes, and use of human acellular dermal matrices. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate these options.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies, from inception to March 23, 2021, without language restriction. We assessed risk of bias and strength of evidence (SoE) using standard methods.

Results

We screened 15,936 citations. Thirty-six mostly high or moderate risk of bias studies (48,419 patients) met criteria. Timing of IBR before or after radiation may result in comparable physical, psychosocial, and sexual well-being, and satisfaction with breasts (all low SoE), and probably comparable risks of implant failure/loss or explantation (moderate SoE). No studies addressed timing relative to chemotherapy. Silicone and saline implants may result in clinically comparable satisfaction with breasts (low SoE). Whether the implant is in the prepectoral or total submuscular plane may not impact risk of infections (low SoE). Acellular dermal matrix use probably increases the risk of implant failure/loss or need for explant surgery (moderate SoE) and may increase the risk of infections (low SoE). Risks of seroma and unplanned repeat surgeries for revision are probably comparable (moderate SoE), and risk of necrosis may be comparable with or without human acellular dermal matrices (low SoE).

Conclusions

Evidence regarding IBR options is mostly of low SoE. New high-quality research is needed, especially for timing, implant materials, and anatomic planes of implant placement.

Implant-based versus Autologous Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

For women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy, the comparative benefits and harms of implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and autologous reconstruction (AR) are not well known. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of IBR versus AR after mastectomy for breast cancer.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies from inception to March 23, 2021. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies and strength of evidence (SoE) of our findings using standard methods.

Results

We screened 15,936 citations and included 40 studies (two randomized controlled trials and 38 adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies). Compared with patients who undergo IBR, those who undergo AR experience clinically significant better sexual well-being [summary adjusted mean difference (adjMD) 5.8, 95% CI 3.4-8.2; three studies] and satisfaction with breasts (summary adjMD 8.1, 95% CI 6.1-10.1; three studies) (moderate SoE for both outcomes). AR was associated with a greater risk of venous thromboembolism (moderate SoE), but IBR was associated with a greater risk of reconstructive failure (moderate SoE) and seroma (low SoE) in long-term follow-up (1.5-4 years). Other outcomes were comparable between groups, or the evidence was insufficient to merit conclusions.

Conclusions

Most evidence regarding IBR versus AR is of low or moderate SoE. AR is probably associated with better sexual well-being and satisfaction with breasts and lower risks of seroma and long-term reconstructive failure but a higher risk of thromboembolic events. New high-quality research is needed to address the important research gaps.

Longitudinal impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy on arm lymphedema in patients with breast cancer: An analysis of serial changes in arm volume measured by infrared optoelectronic volumetry

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

This study was conducted to evaluate the longitudinal impact of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) on persistent severe lymphedema (PSL) using arm volume measurements by an infrared optoelectronic volumetry.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Of the patients who underwent mastectomy between 2008 and 2016, we included 330 patients with secondary arm lymphedema. Percentage of excessive volume (PEV) of the arm were serially assessed using an optoelectronic volumetry 1, 3, 6, 12, 18, 24, 36, and 48 months after the lymphedema diagnosis (T_{lymh_Dx}). We defined PSL as 2 or more episodes of PEV ≥ 20%. Risk factors for PSL were evaluated using stepwise regression analyses.

RESULTS

Patients who received PMRT (n = 202, 61.2%) were more likely to have larger extent of axillary node dissection (AND), and frequent stage II/III lymphedema at T_{lymh_Dx} than those who did not receive PMRT (p < 0.001). With a median follow-up of 72.5 months, PSL occurred in 71 (21.5%) patients. Patients with PSL were more frequently treated with AND of ≥ 20 nodes without reconstruction, had advanced lymphedema stage and higher PEV at T_{lymh_Dx}, and more frequent events of cellulitis compared to those without PSL. The risk of developing PSL was significantly associated with PMRT with regional node irradiation (RNI), AND of ≥20 nodes, lymphedema stage, and PEV at T_{lymh_Dx}, cellulitis, and compliance with physical therapy.

CONCLUSION

PMRT, especially RNI, was associated with a consistent increase in PEV in patients with arm lymphedema. Therefore, timely physical therapy is necessary for this patient population.

Lateral Pectoralis Major Muscle Flap for Axillary Defect Obliteration

This article describes the use of a lateral pectoralis major muscle flap for preemptive obliteration of axillary defects in breast cancer patients having reconstructive surgery. The muscle flap is based on a consistent lateral branch of the pectoral component of the thoracoacromial system. The flap is useful to improve axillary contour after sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymph node dissection, and to cover lymphovenous anastomoses.

Pure fat grafting for breast reconstruction: An alternative autologous breast reconstruction

Plastic surgeons offer various options for breast reconstruction based on patient preference, underlying disease, and comorbidities. An alternative form of breast reconstruction exists, which includes tissue expansion with tissue expander and subsequent fat grafting without the use of implant or flap. We retrospectively reviewed the breast cancer patients who underwent breast reconstruction at our institution to identify those with pure fat grafting. Demographic information, complications, operative details, and BREAST-Q scores were abstracted. From 2010-2015, 10 patients were identified. Patients with unilateral or bilateral mastectomy followed by pure fat grafting had a median of 3.5 or 4 sessions and a total median fat grafting volume of 380 or 974.5 cc, respectively. Patients were followed for 12 months, and no complications or breast cancer recurrences were noted. Finally, BREAST-Q scores at the 12-month follow-up were comparable to the preoperative values.

Lymphedema Signs, Symptoms, and Diagnosis in Women Who Are in Minority and Low-Income Groups and Have Survived Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) is a well-known side effect of cancer and its treatment with wide-ranging prevalence estimates.

OBJECTIVE

This study describes associations between breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) signs, symptoms, and diagnosis for women who were African American, white, or had a low income and survived breast cancer.

DESIGN

This is a cross-sectional, observational study that used a computer-assisted telephone interview.

METHODS

Women who had survived breast cancer were queried on the presence of 5 lymphedema signs and symptoms (edema in the breast, axilla, arm, and/or hand; tissue fibrosis; pitting; hemosiderin staining; heaviness) and whether they had a diagnosis of BCRL. Relationships between signs/symptoms and diagnosis for each group were evaluated with kappa and chi-square statistics.

RESULTS

The study sample included 528 women who had survived breast cancer (266 white and 262 African American), with 514 reporting complete data on household income; 45% of the latter reported an annual household income of ≤$20,000. Women who were African American or had a low income were nearly twice as likely as women who were white to have any of 8 signs/symptoms of BCRL. Regardless of race and income, >50% of women with all BCRL signs and symptoms reported that they were not diagnosed with BCRL.

LIMITATIONS

The main limitations of our study are the lack of medical chart data and longitudinal design.

CONCLUSIONS

Women who were African American or had a low income and had survived breast cancer had a greater burden of BCRL signs and symptoms than women who were white. The lack of a strong association between BCRL signs, symptoms, and diagnosis suggests that BCRL may be underdiagnosed. These findings suggest that more rigorous screening and detection of BCRL-especially for women who are African American or have a low income-may be warranted. Cancer rehabilitation programs may be able to fill this gap.

Neoadjuvant Radiotherapy to Facilitate Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Current Clinical Trials

BACKGROUND

Postmastectomy radiotherapy currently is used for locally advanced breast cancers that carry a high risk of locoregional failure. However, radiotherapy can have deleterious effects on immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). Neoadjuvant radiotherapy (NART) to facilitate postmastectomy IBR is an emerging new therapeutic sequence. A systematic review was undertaken to evaluate the current evidence on the feasibility and safety of this sequence.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov from inception to 2018 was conducted, resulting in 592 records. The review included 18 retrospective and prospective studies of NART and IBR.

RESULTS

The majority of the studies used whole-breast radiotherapy with 50 Gy, conventionally fractionated, and waited 6-8 weeks before surgery. The IBR methods were varied, with both implant and autologous reconstructions. No intraoperative complications occurred, and the postoperative complication rates ranged from 3 to 36%. The partial and total flap loss rates were very low. Studies reporting cosmetic outcomes rated the majority of cases as good or excellent. The pathologic complete response rates ranged from 17 to 55%, and the locoregional recurrence rates were low (≤ 10%), with a short follow-up period. The current MD Anderson Cancer Center prospective clinical trial is described.

CONCLUSIONS

The initial results of NART and IBR demonstrate the safety of this treatment both technically and oncologically. Longer follow-up evaluation of these studies and larger prospective controlled clinical trials are needed to establish this new therapeutic sequence as a standard of care.

Association of sociodemographic and oncological features with decision on implant-based versus autologous immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction in Chinese patients

Background and objectives

Immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction (IPBR) has gained wide popularity in China. We sought to clarify the prevalence and predictors of implant‐based vs autologous IPBR among Chinese patients.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was performed using a prospectively maintained database. Women who underwent IPBR during 2001‐2017 were included. The modality‐specific trends were deciphered by curve fitting analysis. The association of sociodemographic and oncological features with the decision for implant‐based vs autologous IPBR was investigated using multivariate logistic regression and structural equation modeling.

Results

Among 905 patients included in the study, 479 underwent implant‐based IPBR and 426 underwent autologous procedures. The implant/autologous ratio has increased exponentially over time. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that unmarried patients with BMI ≤ 24 kg/m², earlier clinical tumor stage, and preoperative pathological diagnosis of noninvasive lesion are more likely to choose implant‐based IPBR compared to autologous procedures. The indirect effects of age, mastectomy type, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy were further demonstrated by the structural equations.

Conclusions

The sociodemographic and oncological features are directly or indirectly associated with the decision on type of IPBR. The findings may facilitate both patients and physicians to make a high‐quality decision by holistic evaluation of the sociodemographic and oncological features.