Treating Pain and Fat Necrosis after Breast Cancer Surgery with Fat Grafting: Is one Session Enough?

Pain-relieving Effects of Autologous Fat Grafting in Breast Cancer Surgery: A Scoping Review

Background

Chronic pain is relatively common after breast cancer surgery, including breast reconstruction. Autologous fat grafting (AFG) has gained attention as a novel method for breast reconstruction, and recent clinical studies have also shown effects of AFG on alleviation of chronic pain after breast cancer surgery. Our objective was to conduct a scoping review of studies that have examined these effects with clearly defined clinical outcomes.

Methods

A literature search was conducted using three databases: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Google Scholar, following PRISMA guidelines and the Arkesy and O'Malley framework. The search focused on clinical studies of the effects of AFG on chronic pain after breast cancer surgery. All studies reporting functional outcomes, return to work, and secondary surgery in a repeat operation were identified.

Results

Of the 148 studies identified in the search, 11 studies with a total of 684 patients were included in the review. The average volume of fat grafted was approximately 128 mL over an average of 1.6 sessions. The most common time point for assessment was 1 year post-AFG. In all studies with an evidence level of 3 or lower, AFG showed positive results in alleviating pain after breast cancer surgery. However, one of the three randomized controlled trials did not show clinically significant effects.

Conclusions

Most of the studies examined in this review suggested pain-relieving effects of AFG. However, there was one randomized controlled trial in which these effects were not confirmed, indicating a need for further accumulation of cases and performance of new, well-designed randomized controlled trials.

Correction of the Tuberous Breast with Fat Grafting and Implant: Techniques, Evaluation with BREAST-Q, and Preliminary Results

BACKGROUND

The correction of tuberous breast deformity with fat grafting has gained popularity in recent years, but it remains unclear whether this new technique can produce patient satisfaction levels comparable to those achieved with implant-based correction.

METHODS

This study aimed to compare patients' satisfaction and quality of life using the BREAST-Q questionnaire after correction of tuberous breast deformity with fat grafting and implants. Twenty-four patients (36 breasts) were included in our study. Thirteen patients (15 breasts) had a correction with lipofilling (mean 2.67 interventions) and 11 patients (21 breasts) had an implant-based correction (mean 1 intervention).

RESULTS

Both fat and implant treatments showed statistically significant improvements in breast satisfaction (p value=0.001, 0.002, respectively), psychosocial (p value=0.003, 0.003, respectively), and sexual satisfaction (p value=0.008, 0.002, respectively) between the pre-treatment and post-treatment stages. However, the only statistically significant differences between the treatments were observed in the physical condition pre-treatment (p value=0.008) and sexual condition post-treatment (p value=0.030). The outcome of both treatments was not statistically different. Furthermore, the outcome exhibited a statistically significant positive linear relationship with breast satisfaction for both treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that lipofilling can achieve breast and outcome satisfaction comparable to that of implants, although this parity in results comes at the cost of more interventions. These preliminary results lend support to the notion that, as surgeons have access to two equally effective techniques, it is crucial to provide appropriate guidance to patients to ensure their satisfaction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Further Studies are Still Needed to Test Whether Fat Grafting Reduce Postmastectomy Pain

BACKGROUND

To test the effects of autologous fat grafting for reducing postmastectomy pain is important since post-operative pain bothers many patients with postmastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS), and one session autologous fat grafting for this condition is also investigated in some studies. Most of them show the positive effect on pain control, but the most recent randomized controlled trial (RCT) does not. The relatively small sample size with incomplete follow-up in the RCT might limit the certainty of evidence, and cases for the final analysis is lesser than expected numbers by sample size determination. Besides, there is no futility analysis to show the non-significant finding could be conclusive evidence. To check the conclusiveness of comparative evidence on this topic becomes a critical task for guiding clinicians and further studies in the future, therefore the purpose of this letter is to test whether evidence on fat grafting for alleviating pain amongst patients with PMPS is conclusive using sequential analysis.

METHODS

This supplementary analysis used the data from the comparative evidence on fat grafting for PMPS based on the most recent RCT and previous systematic reviews. Complete data of pain score of two comparative studies from Italy were presented in a pooled report, therefore, this letter used data of pooled report for the Italy studies. Pooled mean difference (MD) in pain score between fat grafting and control groups was based on random-effects model. Quantitative synthesis consisted of cumulative meta-analysis and leave-one out sensitivity analysis due to heterogeneity from clinical setting across the included studies. Then, sequential analysis was further done with a conservative effect size (standardized mean difference = 0.2), type I error (α = 0.05), and power of 0.80 based on O'Brien Flemming method. All analyses were carried out using R version 4.1 via RStudio for Microsoft Windows.

RESULTS

Sequential analysis exhibited a non-significant and inconclusive evidence on fat grafting for pain control in PMPS if this synthesis included the newest RCT. Although the pooled result with unmet expectation of z-score in sequential analysis, it might not fall in futility. If the newest RCT was removed from the synthesis, sequential analysis showed significant but inconclusive evidence on fat grafting for pain control in PMPS.

CONCLUSION

There is no conclusive evidence to support or refuse the use of fat grafting in postmastectomy pain control. This topic is worthy of further studies in investigating the effects of fat grafting on pain control amongst patients with PMPS.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .