Delaying implant-based mammary reconstruction after radiotherapy does not decrease capsular contracture: An in vitro study

An Evaluation of Native Breast Dimension and Tissue Expander Inflation Rate on the Risk of Capsular Contracture Development in Postmastectomy Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Capsular contracture is a common complication after 2-stage breast reconstruction. The relationships between native breast size, the rate of tissue expander expansion, and capsule formation have not been elucidated. This study aims to evaluate how these factors contribute to capsular contracture and establish cutoff values for increased risk.

METHODS

A data set consisting of 229 patients who underwent 2-stage breast reconstruction between 2012 and 2021 was included in the study. The rate of expansion is estimated as the final expanded volume subtracted by the initial filling volume of the tissue expander over time elapsed. The native breast size was estimated using various preoperative breast measurements and the weight of mastectomy specimen (grams). Further stratified analysis evaluated patients separately based on postoperative radiation status.

RESULTS

Greater nipple-inframammary fold distance and faster tissue expander enlargement rate conferred decreased odds of developing capsular contracture ( P < 0.05). On stratified analysis, faster tissue expansion rate was not significant in the nonradiated cohort but remained a significant negative predictor in the radiation group (odds ratio, 0.996; P < 0.05). Cut-point analysis showed an expansion rate of <240 mL/mo and a nipple-inframammary fold value of <10.5 cm as conferring a greater risk of capsular contracture.

CONCLUSION

Smaller inframammary fold distance may be associated with a higher risk of capsular contracture. Slower expansion rates correlate with increased odds of contracture in patients undergoing adjuvant radiation. Breast geometry should be considered when risk stratifying various reconstruction approaches (implant vs autologous). In addition, longer delays between implant exchange and initial tissue expansion should be avoided if clinically feasible.

Optimal Timing of Expander-to-Implant Exchange after Irradiation in Immediate Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Time intervals for expander-to-implant exchange from radiation therapy have been reported to reduce device failure. This study investigated the optimal timing of expander-to-implant exchange after irradiation in terms of short- and long-term outcomes.

METHODS

This retrospective review enrolled consecutive patients who underwent immediate two-stage breast reconstruction and radiation therapy to tissue expanders from 2010 to 2019. Receiver operating characteristic curves and the Youden index were used to estimate the optimal time from radiation therapy to implant placement in terms of 49-day (early) and 2-year (late) complications. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify the risk factors for each complication.

RESULTS

Of the 1675 patients, 133 were included. The 49-day and 2-year complication rates were 8.3 percent and 29.7 percent, respectively. Capsular contracture was the most common 2-year complication. The Youden index indicated that implant placement at 131 days after radiation therapy was most effective in reducing the 49-day complications, but that the 2-year complication was less significant, with lower sensitivity and area under the curve. Modified radical mastectomy, expander fill volume at radiation therapy, and size of permanent implant increased the odds of 49-day complications; none of them was associated with the odds of 2-year complications.

CONCLUSIONS

To reduce short-term complications, the best time point for permanent implant placement was 131 days after radiation therapy. However, there was no significant time interval for reducing long-term complications. Capsular contracture was an irreversible complication of radiation injury that was not modified by postirradiation variables including the time from irradiation or size of permanent implant.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

International multidisciplinary expert panel consensus on breast reconstruction and radiotherapy

BACKGROUND

Conflicting evidence challenges clinical decision-making when breast reconstruction is considered in the context of radiotherapy. Current literature was evaluated and key statements on topical issues were generated and discussed by an expert panel at the International Oncoplastic Breast Surgery Meeting in Milan 2017.

METHODS

Studies on radiotherapy and breast reconstruction (1985 to September 2017) were screened using MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL. The literature review yielded 30 controversial key questions. A set of key statements was derived and the highest levels of clinical evidence (LoE) for each of these were summarized. Nineteen panellists convened for dedicated discussions at the International Oncoplastic Breast Surgery Meeting to express agreement, disagreement or abstention for the generated key statements.

RESULTS

The literature review identified 1522 peer-reviewed publications. A list of 22 key statements was produced, with the highest LoE recorded for each statement. These ranged from II to IV, with most statements (11 of 22, 50 per cent) supported by LoE III. There was full consensus for nine (41 per cent) of the 22 key statements, and more than 75 per cent agreement was reached for half (11 of 22).

CONCLUSION

Poor evidence exists on which to base patient-informed consent. Low-quality studies are conflicting with wide-ranging treatment options, precluding expert consensus regarding optimal type and timing of breast reconstruction in the context of radiotherapy. There is a need for high-quality evidence from prospective registries and randomized trials in this field.