Predictors of complications after direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Early Experience of Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction Using Acellular Dermal Matrix after Robot-Assisted Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

The authors performed a retrospective review to analyze operative outcomes of breast mound reconstruction after robot-assisted mastectomy.

METHODS

Patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with a robotic device (Da Vinci Xi) and immediate prepectoral prosthetic reconstruction by lateral incision from June of 2018 to July of 2019 were enrolled. Patient characteristics, complications, and satisfaction rates as assessed by BREAST-Q were analyzed. The surgical technique was described in detail.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine cases, including 7 bilateral cases (total 46 breasts), underwent robot-assisted NSM followed by immediate prepectoral prosthetic implant reconstruction. The median patient age was 46.63 years (range, 21 to 63 years). The mean operation time for each prepectoral breast mound reconstruction using the direct-to-implant technique was 126.55 minutes. Robot-assisted reconstruction resulted in superior BREAST-Q scores compared with the conventional reconstruction method. Major infection occurred in 7 cases (15.2%), and complete nipple loss occurred in 3 cases (6.6%). Severe complications requiring breast implant removal occurred in 4 breasts (8.7%). Two cases were due to the coexistence of infection and skin necrosis; in 1 case, the skin flap became congested on postoperative day 3 and required additional surgery to change the expander. Other complications were resolved with conservative care or minor revision.

CONCLUSIONS

This report is the first concerning robot-assisted NSM followed by prepectoral acellular dermal matrix-wrapped prosthetic reconstruction. This procedure was not inferior to other methods. Further prospective research to evaluate oncologic outcomes is warranted.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Prepectoral Direct-to-Implant versus Staged Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison of Complications

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction has multiple advantages over a staged tissue expander (TE) approach. However, its use may be limited by concerns of increased complications. This study is the largest series to date comparing postoperative outcomes for DTI versus TE reconstruction in the prepectoral plane.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively reviewed 348 patients who underwent 536 total immediate, prepectoral implant-based breast reconstructions between January of 2018 and December of 2021. The authors compared the presence of risk factors and the rate of six separate complications between patients who underwent DTI versus TE reconstruction up to 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Of 348 patients, 147 (42%) and 201 (58%) underwent TE and DTI reconstruction ( P = 0.1813), respectively. The overall infection rate was 16.4% ( n = 57). DTI patients had a significantly greater incidence of wounds ( P < 0.0001), including minor ( P < 0.0011) and major wounds ( P < 0.0053). Significantly greater mastectomy resection weights were found for DTI patients who experienced any complication ( P < 0.0076), postoperative wounds ( P < 0.0001), and major wounds specifically ( P < 0.0035). Compared with medium-thickness acellular dermal matrix (ADM), extra thick ADM was associated with significantly increased rates of infection ( P < 0.0408) and wounds ( P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Prepectoral DTI reconstruction in patients with adequate flap perfusion may have complication rates comparable to staged TE reconstruction, apart from a higher incidence of postoperative wounds. Greater mastectomy resection weights and thickness of ADM may specifically contribute to infection and wound-healing complications. Prepectoral DTI reconstruction is encouraged in the patients with adequate flap perfusion and moderate to low mastectomy resection weights who desire comparable or smaller implant volumes.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Autologous coverage for direct-to-implant pre-pectoral reconstruction in large and ptotic breasts: a new technique

Direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after skin reducing mastectomy in large and ptotic breast is characterized by a high rate of complication. The Dermal Sling is commonly used to give extra coverage to the lower pole of the mammary implant to lower the risk of implant exposure in case of wound dehiscence at the T-junction. The aim of the paper is to detail an original technique that combines an inferior dermal sling with pectoral and serratus fascial flaps, to create a pre-pectoral pouch. We retrospectively review the clinical data of the patients who underwent Type IV/V mastectomy and DTI breast reconstruction with the described technique. Minor and major post operative complications were analyzed. Patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcomes were evaluated at one year of follow-up through Breast-Q and Validated Aesthetic Scale. Ten patients (fourteen breasts) were included in the study. Skin and/or NAC necrosis occurred in three breasts. One patient underwent implant removal due to periprosthetic infection. At one of follow-up no capsular contracture nor migration of the implant were clinically detected in all patients. One patient had a visible rippling at the upper quadrants of the new breast. Good patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcomes were reported. The association of fascial flaps and dermal sling is a viable option for breast reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts. Along with providing an autologous coverage for the implant, it allows to maintain a good projection, maximize symmetrization in case of concomitant contralateral reduction mammoplasty and avoid any implant displacement.

Risk Factors for Unplanned Reoperation during the Expansion Phase in Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction in the Dutch Breast Implant Registry

BACKGROUND

The majority of postmastectomy breast reconstructions (PMBRs) are currently performed in two stages using a tissue expander (TE). However, complications during the expansion phase occur regularly, leading to unplanned reoperations and/or reconstruction failure. This study aimed to identify risk factors for unplanned reoperation after TE placement, assessed the time until unplanned and planned reoperation, and investigated indications for unplanned reoperation.

METHODS

Patient- and surgery-related characteristics of patients who underwent two-stage PMBR between 2017 and 2021 were collected from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR). Unplanned reoperation was defined as TE explantation followed by either no replacement or replacement with the same or a different TE. Covariate-adjusted characteristics associated with unplanned reoperation were determined using backward stepwise selection and multivariable logistic regression analyses.

RESULTS

In total, 2529 patients (mean age, 50.2 years) were included. Unplanned reoperation occurred in 19.4% of all registered TEs ( n = 3190). Independent factors associated with unplanned reoperation were body mass index (BMI) greater than or equal to 25 kg/m 2 (adjusted OR [aOR], 1.63, 99% CI, 1.20 to 2.57 for BMI of 25 to 29.9 kg/m 2 ; aOR, 2.57, 99% CI, 1.74 to 3.78 for BMI ≥30 kg/m 2 ), low institutional volume (aOR, 1.51; 99% CI, 1.06 to 2.18), no drains (aOR, 2.06; 99% CI, 1.15 to 3.60), subcutaneous TE placement (aOR, 5.71; 99% CI, 3.59 to 9.10), and partial pectoralis major muscle coverage (aOR, 1.35; 99% CI, 1.02 to 1.79). Age younger than 40 years (aOR, 0.49; 99% CI, 0.32 to 0.74) and delayed PMBR (aOR, 0.35; 99% CI, 0.19 to 0.60) reduced the risk of unplanned reoperation. Median time until reoperation was 97 days for unplanned and 213 days for planned reoperation. Deep wound infections were most often registered as indication for unplanned reoperation (34.4%).

CONCLUSION

This study identified several risk factors for unplanned reoperation that may be used to reduce complications in expander-based PMBR.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Dynamic insights into infection risk over time in two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Infections following postmastectomy implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) can compromise surgical outcomes and lead to significant morbidity. This study aimed to discern the timing of infections in two-stage IBR and associated risk factors.

METHOD

A review of electronic health records was conducted on 1096 breasts in 1058 patients undergoing two-stage IBR at Seoul National University Hospital (2015-2020). Infections following the first-stage tissue expander (TE) insertion and second-stage TE exchange were analyzed separately, considering associated risk factors.

RESULTS

Over a median follow-up of 53.5 months, infections occurred in 2.9% (32/1096) after the first stage and 4.1% (44/1070) after the second stage. Infections following the first-stage procedure exhibited a bimodal distribution across time, while those after the second-stage procedure showed a unimodal pattern. When analyzing risk factors for infection after the first-stage procedure, axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was associated with early (≤7 weeks) infection, while both ALND and obesity were independent predictors of late (>7 weeks) infection. For infections following the second-stage procedure, obesity, postmastectomy radiotherapy, a history of expander infection, ALND, and the use of textured implants were identified as independent risk factors. Postmastectomy radiotherapy was related to non-salvaged outcomes after infection following both stages.

CONCLUSION

Infections following first and second-stage IBR exhibit distinct timelines reflecting different pathophysiology. Understanding these timelines and associated risk factors will inform patient selection for IBR and aid in tailored postoperative surveillance planning. These findings contribute to refining patient suitability for IBR and optimizing personalized postoperative care strategies.

A systematic review of randomised controlled trials in breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

For preference sensitive treatments, such as breast reconstructions, there are barriers to conducting randomised controlled trials (RCTs). The primary aims of this systematic review were to investigate what type of research questions are explored by RCTs in breast reconstruction, where have they been performed and where have they been published, and to thematise the research questions and thus create an overview of the state of the research field.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials investigating any aspect of breast reconstructions were included. The PubMed database was searched with a pre-defined search string. Inclusion and data abstraction was performed in a pre-defined standardised fashion. For the purpose of this study, we defined key issues as comparison of categories of breast reconstruction and comparison of immediate and delayed breast reconstruction, when the thematisation was done.

RESULTS

A total of 419 abstracts were retrieved from the search. Of the 419, 310 were excluded as they were not RCTs concerning some aspect of breast reconstruction, which left us with 110 abstracts to be included in the study. The research questions of the included studies could more or less be divided into seven different themes inclusive of 2 key issues: Other issues - comparison of different categories of breast reconstruction, comparison of immediate and delayed breast reconstruction, surgical details within a category of breast reconstruction, surgical details valid for several categories of breast reconstruction, donor site management, anaesthetics, and non-surgical details. Only five studies compared key issues, and they all illustrate the challenges with RCTs in breast reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

A total of 110 publications based on RCTs in breast reconstruction have been published. Seven themes of research questions could be identified. Only five studies have explored the key issues. Better scientific evidence is needed for the key issues in breast reconstruction, for example by implementing a new study design in the field.

One-Stage Immediate Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction in Large and Ptotic Breasts: An Institutional Algorithm

Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts may be challenging due to skin redundancy. The use of a reduction mammoplasty pattern for the mastectomy skin excision has proven to be a reliable option for these patients as it allows for a better shape, projection, and symmetrization. This approach has been described in the literature for both one- and two-stage reconstruction with either sub- or pre-pectoral reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) or non-biological mesh. One-stage immediate breast reconstructions have a positive significant impact on patients' psychosocial well-being and quality of life. The purpose of this paper is to describe an institutional algorithm that allows one to perform one-stage implant-based breast reconstructions in patients with large and ptotic breasts.

Direct to implant reconstruction with adjustable permanent Becker implant expanders with ADM following de-epithelised skin reducing mastectomy in high-risk overweight and obese patients with severe ptosis

Overweight and obese patients with severe ptosis undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction present a challenge to the oncoplastic breast surgeon. This paper investigates early-to medium-term outcome of high-risk overweight and obese women with severe ptosis undergoing de-epithelised skin reducing mastectomy and direct to implant reconstruction with Becker implant expanders. From Nov 2016 and April 2021, 20 Wise pattern skin reducing mastectomies (SRM) were performed, 18 with Adjustable Permanent Becker Implant expanders (APBI) and 2 with fixed volume implants. Median age was 48 years (27-73), and median FU was 21 months (4-49). There were 8 smokers and 7 patients needed radiation treatment. In the ABPI group, there was one infection, 3 patients had threatened wounds which needed revision, and one patient lost her implant. There was no locoregional recurrence or distant metastasis. There was 1 week delay in adjuvant chemotherapy for a patient with wound issues following reconstruction. One patient is awaiting autologous reconstruction following deformity subsequent to radiation treatment. In conclusion the use of APBI following de-epithelised skin reduction surgery in this high-risk group is an option with acceptable early-to medium-term outcome.

Single Institution Evolution in Defining an Algorithm for Prevention and Management of Severe Complications in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Complications including infection and wound dehiscence are major concerns for direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction. However, the risk factors associated with severe complications and implant salvage remain unclear.

METHODS

Retrospective study of all patients undergoing unilateral DTI breast reconstruction from 2014 through 2019. The risk factors associated with complications and prosthesis explantation were identified using multivariate logistic regression modeling and interaction analyses.

RESULTS

Among 1027 patients enrolled, 90 experienced severe complications, 41of which underwent prosthesis explantation, while 49 were successfully salvaged. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that patients with larger implant size (p=0.003), use of bovine mesh (p<0.001), adjuvant radiotherapy (p=0.047), low plasma albumin (p=0.013), and elevated blood glucose (p=0.006) were significantly more likely to suffer complications. Adjuvant radiation (OR: 7.44; 95%CI, 1.49-37.18; p = 0.014) and obesity (OR, 4.17; 95%CI, 1.17-14.88; p = 0.028) had significantly lower rates of implant salvage as well as surgical site infection (SSI) and wound dehiscence, while mastectomy skin flap necrosis was not associated with device explanation. There were no differences in complication and explantation rates between nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomies. However, the combined impact of SSI and wound dehiscence added over fourteen-fold higher risk of prosthesis explantation (95%CI, 9.97-19.53).

CONCLUSION

Success in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction is multifactorial. Larger implant size, adjuvant radiation therapy, diabetes, and malnutrition demonstrate increased risk of complications in the DTI approach. Surgical site infections and wound dehiscence should be treated aggressively, but the combination of both complications portends poor salvage rates.

Risk of major postoperative complications in breast reconstructive surgery with and without an acellular dermal matrix; Development of a prognostic prediction model

Introduction

Acellular dermal matrices (ADM) have been suggested to allow for different approaches and reduce the risk of postoperative complications in implant-based breast surgery. Surgeons seem to embrace ADMs around the world, although a lack of consistent evidence regarding the factors that increase the risk of major postoperative complications remains.

Purpose

To develop and internally validate a model to predict the risk of a major postoperative complication in breast reconstructive surgery with and without an ADM.

Methodology

The DBIR is an opt-out registry that holds characteristics of all breast implant surgeries in the Netherlands since 2015. Using a literature-driven preselection of predictors, multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression modelling was used to develop the prediction model.

Results

A total of 2939 breasts were eligible, of which 11% underwent an ADM-assisted procedure (single-stage or two-stage). However, 31% underwent a two-stage procedure (with or without the use of ADM). Of all breasts, 10.2% developed a major postoperative complication. Age (OR 1.01), delayed timing (OR 0.71), and two-stage technique (OR 4.46) were associated with the outcome.

Conclusion

The data suggest that ADM use was not associated with a major postoperative complication, while two-stage reconstructions were strongly associated with an increased risk of major complications. Despite these findings, ADMs are not as popular in the Netherlands as in the USA. The predictive capabilities of the developed model are mediocre to poor, but because of the above findings, we believe that the role of the two-stage technique as a golden standard should be put up for debate.

Human Acellular Dermal Matrix (Epiflex®) in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Skin- and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Treatment of Capsular Fibrosis: Results of a Multicenter, Prospective, Observational NOGGO-AWOGyn Study

Background

Over the last decades, the number of acellular dermal matrix (ADM)-assisted implant-based breast reconstructions (IBBR) has substantially increased. However, there is still a lack of prospective data on complication rates.

Methods

We performed a non-interventional, multicenter, prospective cohort study to evaluate complication rates of a human ADM in patients undergoing an IBBR after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomies. Patients with primary reconstruction (cohort A) and patients undergoing a secondary reconstruction after capsular fibrosis (cohort B) using the human ADM Epiflex® (DIZG gGmbH, Berlin, Germany) were enrolled in this study. Patients were followed-up for 12 months after surgery.

Results

Eighty-four eligible patients were included in this study of whom 28 women underwent a bilateral breast reconstruction, leading to 112 human ADM-assisted reconstructions in total (cohort A: 73, cohort B: 39). In 33.0% of the reconstructed breasts at least one of the complications of primary interest occurred, including implant loss 7.1%, seroma 15.2%; infection 5.4%, rash 8.0%, and Baker grade III/IV capsular fibrosis 2.7%, with no statistically significant differences between the cohorts. Previous radiation therapy was significantly associated with occurrence of any postoperative complication (OR 20.41; p value 0.027).

Conclusion

The rates of most complications were comparable to the rates reported for other ADMs with relatively low rates of capsular fibrosis and infections. The rate of seroma was increased in our study. Prior radiation therapy increased the risk of any postoperative complications. Therefore, the use of ADM in these patients should be considered carefully.

Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictive factors of adverse surgical outcomes in Asian patients

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) provides reliable outcomes; however, the use of ADM is associated with a higher risk of complications. We analyzed our experiences of post-NSM DTI without ADM and identified the predictive factors of adverse surgical outcomes.

METHODS

Patients who underwent NSM and immediate DTI or two-stage tissue expander (TE) breast reconstruction from 2009 to 2020 were enrolled. Predictors of adverse endpoints were analyzed.

RESULTS

There were 100 DTI and 29 TE reconstructions. The TE group had a higher rate of postmastectomy radiotherapy (31% vs. 11%; P=0.009), larger specimens (317.37±176.42 g vs. 272.08±126.33 g; P=0.047), larger implants (360.84±85.19 g vs. 298.83±81.13 g; P=0.004) and a higher implant/TE exposure ratio (10.3% vs. 1%; P=0.035). In DTI reconstruction, age over 50 years (odds ratio [OR], 5.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.50-19.74; P=0.010) and a larger mastectomy weight (OR, 1.65; 95% CI, 1.08-2.51; P=0.021) were associated with a higher risk of acute complications. Intraoperative radiotherapy for the nipple-areolar complex increased the risk of acute complications (OR, 4.05; 95% CI, 1.07-15.27; P=0.039) and the likelihood of revision surgery (OR, 5.57; 95% CI, 1.25-24.93; P=0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate DTI breast reconstruction following NSM is feasible in Asian patients with smaller breasts.

Comparing Surgical Site Occurrences in 1 versus 2-stage Breast Reconstruction via Federated EMR Network

TriNetX (TriNetX Inc., Cambridge, Mass.) is a federated electronic medical record network. The TriNetX system conducts customized search queries of over 36 million electronic medical records, and returns results in just minutes. To our group’s knowledge, TriNetX has not been previously used in plastic surgery research. This study aimed to utilize a continuously updated federated network of 36,000,000 electronic medical records (TriNetX) for comparing 90-day postoperative outcomes between prosthetic breast reconstruction techniques.

Comparison of one-stage direct-to-implant with acellular dermal matrix and two-stage immediate implant-based breast reconstruction-a cohort study

Background

The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in one-stage immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (BR) may offer advantages over the two-stage expander-to-implant technique, but literature shows conflicting results. The aim of the present study was to compare these two techniques for immediate implant-based BR regarding postoperative complications, aesthetic correction procedures and aesthetic outcome.

Methods

The study was designed as an observational cohort study with 44 participants admitted for immediate implant-based BR at Department of Plastic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. 21 patients underwent BR with a one-stage direct-to-implant technique using ADM and 23 patients underwent BR with a two-stage expander-to-implant technique. Follow-up time was 2 years.

Results

The risk of implant loss was equal between groups; one-stage group 16% and two-stage group 17% whereas the risk of implant exchange (but not loss of BR) was 13% in the one-stage group compared to 7% in the two-stage group. The risk of at least one major complication were equal between groups; 28% and 24% but the risk of at least one minor complication was significantly higher in the two-stage group (41%) compared to the one-stage group (3%). Number of aesthetic corrections were equally frequent in the two treatment groups (one-stage group 1.8, two-stage group 1.5). Patient and investigator assessed aesthetic outcome was very high in both groups as well as the degree of symmetry between breasts. No capsular contracture Baker grade 3 or 4 was observed.

Conclusions

The present study design sets limitations for drawing wide conclusions. This study did not reveal any significant differences between the two breast reconstructive techniques besides a higher risk of minor complications in the two-stage group, that did, however, not lead to a higher risk of implant loss. With equally high satisfaction with the aesthetic result and no significant difference in number of aesthetic corrections between the two groups we suggest, that the one-stage approach using ADM may be feasible and allows the patient to achieve an implant-based BR with a minimum of surgeries and outpatient visits. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04209010).

Direct to implant breast reconstruction with biological acellular dermal matrices

Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed female cancer in the UK, with one in eight women receiving a cancer diagnosis during their lifetime. Forty per cent of women diagnosed with breast cancer undergo mastectomy as their primary therapeutic procedure. While a full range of choices is offered, breast reconstruction using implants is the patient-preferred method of reconstruction following mastectomy. This review discusses the evolution of implant-based reconstruction, focusing on the recent trend towards prepectoral breast reconstruction. Key quality indicators in the current literature are considered, including oncological outcomes, aesthetics and patient-related outcome measures, as are the health-care economics of this emerging surgical technique.

Effect of Body Mass Index on Outcomes after Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Body mass index has been shown to be a predictor of outcomes after subpectoral expander/implant reconstruction, with every unit increase in body mass index increasing the risk of complications by approximately 6 percent. The effect of body mass index on complications after prepectoral reconstruction has not yet been evaluated and is the purpose of this study.

METHODS

A total of 366 reconstructed breasts from 197 patients were stratified into five body mass index groups (normal; overweight; and class I, class II, and class III, obese) and postoperative complications were compared across the groups. Additional analyses were performed using broad classifications of body mass index into nonobese and obese in addition to normal, overweight, and obese. Body mass index as an independent predictor of complications was assessed using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

Complication rates did not differ significantly across body mass index groups when using the broad classifications. With five-group stratification, significantly higher rates of return to operating room, expander/implant loss, skin necrosis, wound dehiscence, and overall complications were seen in class II and/or class III obese versus overweight patients. However, on multivariate logistic regression analyses, body mass index, as a continuous variable, did not independently predict any complication. Diabetes and smoking emerged as significant predictors of any complication, indicating that these factors, rather than body mass index, were driving the increased rates of complications seen in the high-body mass index groups.

CONCLUSION

Body mass index alone is not a predictor of outcomes after prepectoral expander/implant breast reconstruction and should not be used to estimate risk of postoperative complications or exclude patients for prepectoral reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, II.

Acellular dermal matrices as an adjunct to implant breast reconstruction: Analysis of outcomes and complications

PURPOSE

Acellular dermal matrices (ADM) are increasingly used in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). Uncertainty remains with regard to their efficacy and complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the outcomes and complication rates associated with the use of ADMs in IBR.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing ADM-assisted IBR between 2008 and 2013. Cases were identified from a prospectively collected database. Simple descriptive statistics and logistic regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

A total of 110 patients (175 mastectomies) were included in the analysis. The median age was 46 (19-75) years and the median BMI was 22.2 (16.2-41.5). Seventy nine mastectomies were performed for therapeutic purposes. The median mastectomy weight was 244 (185-335) gr. The majority of reconstructions were performed with fixed volume (n = 115, 66%) or permanent expandable implants (n = 53, 30%) as one-stage procedures. Forty mastectomies were associated with at least one complication. The infection rate was 2.3% (n = 4). Post-operative haematoma developed in 5 cases (2.9%), but only 2 required surgical interventions. Three mastectomies were complicated by nipple necrosis (3.6%), 3 with skin necrosis (1.7%) and 9 with wound dehiscence (5.1%). The capsule formation rate was 2.3% (n = 4). Reconstruction failure with implant loss occurred in 3 cases (1.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

The complication rates following ADM-assisted IBR can be very low with appropriate patient selection and meticulous surgical technique. This supports the safety of using ADM in carefully selected patients. Further research is warranted to assess the health economics of ADM use in IBR.

Short-term cost-effectiveness of one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage expander-implant reconstruction from a multicentre randomized clinical trial

Background

Implant‐based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure and its economic impact is significant. This study aimed to analyse whether a direct one‐stage IBBR with use of an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is more cost‐effective than two‐stage (expander‐implant) breast reconstruction.

Methods

The BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage) study was an open‐label multicentre RCT in which women scheduled for skin‐sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR were randomized between one‐stage IBBR with ADM or two‐stage IBBR. Duration of surgery and hospital stay, and visits for the primary surgery, unplanned and cosmetic procedures were recorded. Costs were estimated at an institutional level. Health status was assessed by means of the EuroQol Five Dimensions 5L questionnaire.

Results

Fifty‐nine patients (91 breasts) underwent one‐stage IBBR with ADM and 62 patients (92 breasts) two‐stage IBBR. The mean(s.d.) duration of surgery in the one‐stage group was significantly longer than that for two‐stage IBBR for unilateral (2·52(0·55) versus 2·02(0·35) h; P < 0·001) and bilateral (4·03(1·00) versus 3·25(0·58) h; P = 0·017) reconstructions. Costs were higher for one‐stage compared with two‐stage IBBR for both unilateral (€12 448 (95 per cent c.i. 10 722 to 14 387) versus €9871 (9373 to 10 445) respectively; P = 0·025) and bilateral (€16 939 (14 887 to 19 360) versus €13 383 (12 414 to 14 669); P = 0·002) reconstructions. This was partly related to the use of relatively expensive ADM. There was no difference in postoperative health status between the groups.

Conclusion

One‐stage IBBR with ADM was associated with higher costs, but similar health status, compared with conventional two‐stage IBBR. Registration number: NTR5446 ( http://www.trialregister.nl).

Short-term safety outcomes of mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction with and without mesh (iBRA): a multicentre, prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Use of biological or synthetic mesh might improve outcomes of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction-breast reconstruction with implants or expanders at the time of mastectomy-but there is a lack of high-quality evidence to support the safety or effectiveness of the technique. We aimed to establish the short-term safety of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction performed with and without mesh, to inform the feasibility of undertaking a future randomised clinical trial comparing different breast reconstruction techniques.

METHODS

In this prospective, multicentre cohort study, we consecutively recruited women aged 16 years or older who had any type of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction for malignancy or risk reduction, with any technique, at 81 participating breast and plastic surgical units in the UK. Data about patient demographics and operative, oncological, and complication details were collected before and after surgery. Outcomes of interest were implant loss (defined as unplanned removal of the expander or implant), infection requiring treatment with antibiotics or surgery, unplanned return to theatre, and unplanned re-admission to hospital for complications of reconstructive surgery, up to 3 months after reconstruction and assessed by clinical review or patient self-report. Follow-up is complete. The study is registered with the ISRCTN Registry, number ISRCTN37664281.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 1, 2014, and June 30, 2016, 2108 patients had 2655 mastectomies with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction at 81 units across the UK. 1650 (78%) patients had planned single-stage reconstructions (including 12 patients who had a different technique per breast). 1376 (65%) patients had reconstruction with biological (1133 [54%]) or synthetic (243 [12%]) mesh, 181 (9%) had non-mesh submuscular or subfascial implants, 440 (21%) had dermal sling implants, 42 (2%) had pre-pectoral implants, and 79 (4%) had other or a combination of implants. 3-month outcome data were available for 2081 (99%) patients. Of these patients, 182 (9%, 95% CI 8-10) experienced implant loss, 372 (18%, 16-20) required re-admission to hospital, and 370 (18%, 16-20) required return to theatre for complications within 3 months of their initial surgery. 522 (25%, 95% CI 23-27) patients required treatment for an infection. The rates of all of these complications are higher than those in the National Quality Standards (<5% for re-operation, re-admission, and implant loss, and <10% for infection).

INTERPRETATION

Complications after immediate implant-based breast reconstruction are higher than recommended by national standards. A randomised clinical trial is needed to establish the optimal approach to immediate implant-based breast reconstruction.

FUNDING

National Institute for Health Research, Association of Breast Surgery, and British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.

Quality of life and patient satisfaction after one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix versus two-stage breast reconstruction (BRIOS): primary outcome of a randomised, controlled trial

BACKGROUND

There is increasing interest in the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). Suggested advantages are that ADMs facilitate one-stage IBBR and improve aesthetic outcomes. We compared immediate one-stage ADM-assisted IBBR with two-stage IBBR (current standard of care). Our previously reported secondary endpoint showed that one-stage ADM-assisted IBBR was associated with significantly more adverse outcomes. Here, we present the primary endpoint results aiming to assess whether one-stage IBBR with ADM provides higher patient-reported quality of life (QOL) compared with two-stage IBBR.

METHODS

This multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial (BRIOS study) was done in eight hospitals in the Netherlands. We recruited women aged older than 18 years with breast carcinoma or a genetic predisposition who intended to undergo skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate IBBR. Participants were randomly assigned to undergo one-stage IBBR with ADM (Strattice, LifeCell, Branchburg, NJ, USA) or two-stage IBBR. Randomisation was stratified by centre and indication for surgery (oncological or prophylactic) in blocks of ten participants. The primary endpoint was patient-reported QOL, as measured with the BREAST-Q (ie, health-related QOL scales and satisfaction scales), in the modified intention-to-treat population. The study follow-up is complete. This study is registered with the Netherlands Trial Register, number NTR5446.

FINDINGS

Between April 14, 2013, and May 29, 2015, we enrolled 142 women, of whom 69 were randomly assigned to receive one-stage ADM-assisted IBBR and 73 to receive two-stage IBBR. After exclusions, the modified intention-to-treat population comprised 60 patients in the one-stage group and 61 patients in the two-stage group. Of these, 48 women (mean follow-up 17·0 months [SD 7·8]) in the one-stage group and 44 women (17·2 months [SD 6·7]) in the two-stage group completed the BREAST-Q at least 1 year after implant placement. We found no significant differences in postoperative patient-reported QOL domains, including physical wellbeing (one-stage mean 78·0 [SD 14·1] vs two-stage 79·3 [12·2], p=0·60), psychosocial wellbeing (72·6 [17·3] vs 72·8 [19·6], p=0·95), and sexual wellbeing (58·0 [17·0] vs 57·1 [19·5], p=0·82), or in the patient-reported satisfaction domains: satisfaction with breasts (63·4 [15·8] vs 60·3 [15·4], p=0·35) and satisfaction with outcome (72·8 [19·1] vs 67·8 [16·3], p=0·19).

INTERPRETATION

Taken together with our previously published findings, one-stage IBBR with ADM does not yield superior results in terms of patient-reported QOL compared with two-stage IBBR. Risks for adverse outcomes were significantly higher in the one-stage ADM group. Use of ADM for one-stage IBBM should be considered on a case-by-case basis.

FUNDING

Pink Ribbon, Nuts-Ohra, and LifeCell.