The propeller flap: a one-stage procedure for nipple-areola reconstruction

Nipple-areola complex reconstruction techniques: A literature review

Many techniques for nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction are described. Clarity is required on the currently available options. Since a complete list of all the techniques described until now is not available, a possibly comprehensive literature overview was carried out from 75 papers (years 1946-2015). The local flap was the most frequently described technique for the nipple reconstruction with no significant difference in complications' rate among the various types of techniques. Complications in nipple reconstruction were 46.9% after graft, 7.9% after local flap, and 5.3% in case of flaps with autologous graft/alloplastic/allograft augmentation, while complications in areola reconstruction were 10.1% after graft, and 1.6% after areola tattoo. Flaps appear to be more reliable than grafts in nipple reconstruction, while tattoo is thought to be safer than graft in areola reconstruction. The loss of projection, although considerable (45%-75%), had not significant impact on patients' satisfaction. Due to contraction, overcorrection of 25-50% of the desired result is advisory when adopting local flaps, in order to prevent loss of projection. The use of flaps with autologous graft/alloplastic/allograft augmentation (cartilage, fat, calcium hydroxylapatite, acellular dermal matrix, polymethylmethacrylate, biologic collagen) showed a minor loss of nipple projection but may expose to a relative increased number of postoperative flap necrosis.

A new method for using a silicone rod for permanent nipple projection after breast reconstruction procedures

Nipple-areola complex (NAC) is a unique part of the human body. Not only is it a functional structure, but it plays an aesthetic role as well. It offers the final touch to the convex shape of the breast. Its lack frequently leads to depression in patients. This paper describes the method used by the authors for reconstructing nipple mound projection in patients following an autologous breast reconstruction procedure. To reconstruct the nipple mound an adapted local C-V flap technique described by Losken was used, with a silicone rod to support the nipple. The new method is based on simple preparation of flaps, fixing the silicone rod at the nipple bottom and below the top, it is quick and efficient in terms of time and materials used. The procedure was conducted in 30 patients: 10 cases following LDf reconstruction and Becker prosthesis or expander prosthesis, 20 cases following body tissue reconstruction with TRAM flap (Transverse Rectus Abdominis Musculocutaneous flap). All the patients who had undergone the LDf procedure developed flap necrosis followed by rod removal. In the patients who had undergone TRAM flap reconstruction no necrosis or wound split was observed, healing progressed without complications. In this group durable nipple projection was achieved. The new method for reconstructing nipple projection may be applied both in simultaneous and staged procedures, only in patients who have undergone autologous breast reconstruction procedure.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The nipple is an uncommon site for breast cancer development, but the nipple-areola complex is routinely excised in breast cancer treatment. The authors evaluated the risks and benefits of nipple- or areola-sparing mastectomy with breast reconstruction.

METHODS

The authors analyzed data on 115 consecutive nipple- or areola-sparing mastectomies with immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction performed in 66 patients from 1998 to 2008 at a single tertiary-care cancer center. Nipple-sparing mastectomies were performed for prophylaxis (n = 75) or treatment of disease (n = 40).

RESULTS

Mean patient age was 45 years (range, 24 to 61 years) and mean follow-up time was 22 months (range, 2 weeks to 91 months). There were 115 nipple- or areola-sparing mastectomies (48 bilateral and 19 unilateral), including 111 nipple-sparing and four areola-sparing mastectomies. On pathologic review, 20 breasts had ductal carcinoma in situ, 20 breasts had invasive cancer, 11 breasts had lobular carcinoma in situ, one breast had phyllodes tumor, one breast had mucinous carcinoma, and 62 breasts were cancer-free. Incision placement was periareolar and radial (n = 61), inframammary (n = 25), omega type (n = 14), customized to include a previous scar (n = 10), or transareolar (n = 5). Of all 115 nipple- or areola-sparing mastectomies, six nipples were lost because of occult disease (5.2 percent), and four nipples were lost because of wound-healing problems (3.5 percent).

CONCLUSIONS

In the authors' series of nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomies performed for risk reduction or breast cancer, there was a low incidence of occult disease (5.2 percent). Nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy may be feasible in selected patients and should be the subject of additional investigation.

A new technique in nipple reconstruction: dome technique with double pedicle

BACKGROUND

One of the main steps for satisfactory breast reconstruction is symmetrical nipple reconstruction in an ideal position and projection. Various techniques, using cartilage, bone, fat, and even hydroxyapatite crystals, have been proposed to overcome projection loss in late term.

METHOD

We present a new nipple reconstruction technique performed in 6 cases. In this technique, the nipple dome is nourished by a double pedicle and supported by lateral flaps. Nipple projection is secured with 4/0 nylon sutures, which are applied between pedicles. Skin excess is advanced to the donor areas of nipple flaps.

RESULTS

All patients were discharged the day after the operation, and nipple flaps healed well. No projection loss was noted in the 8- to 12-month follow-up period. Areola shape and consistency were acceptable.

CONCLUSION

Due to the presence of a double pedicle, this technique is especially helpful for patients with possible circulatory problems. Tension-free closure and rich blood supply to the nipple dome prevent loss of projection in the late term.

Reconstruction of the nipple-areola complex: an update

Along with continuing progress in reconstructive surgery of the breast numerous techniques of nipple-areola reconstruction have been developed. With time and experience some methods have been discredited to historical significance only while others have evolved to widely accepted concepts used by surgeons all over the world, which in turn contributed new ideas and modifications. In addition to those favourite techniques others are reserved as second-line alternatives in specific situations. The principle criterion for a pleasing nipple-areola complex is symmetry regarding several parameters: colour, texture, size, and projection. The purpose of this manuscript is to review and discuss the concepts and techniques of nipple-areola reconstruction that have evolved over the past decades. Furthermore, those principles and techniques are pointed out that fulfil best the criteria of an ideal nipple-areola complex with emphasis on different techniques of breast reconstruction and individual conditions of the patient.

Simultaneous reconstruction of breast and well-projected nipple after expansion of mammary skin

The problem of postoperative reduction of projecting reconstructed nipples remains to be resolved. To this end we did a clinical study of reconstructing the nipple at the same time as the breast. A tissue-expander was placed under the skin of the breast at the first operation, and then the breast and nipple were reconstructed at the second. A nipple was reconstructed using a dermal-fat flap harvested from the myocutaneous flaps used for reconstruction of the breast. A small hole was made in the corresponding site of the skin of the breast, and the reconstructed nipple was projected through the hole. This method was used in 8 cases. This method is useful in reconstructing a breast without a pad of skin and a projected nipple simultaneously. Its disadvantages are the relatively weak blood supply of the flaps, and difficulty in calculating the position of the nipple. The procedure may be beneficial for selected cases.