"Systematic review and meta-analysis of immediate versus delayed autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy adjuvant radiation therapy"

Post-mastectomy radiation therapy after breast reconstruction: from historic dogmas to practical expert agreements based on a large literature review of surgical and radiation therapy considerations

Breast reconstruction (BR) after mastectomy is important to consider for a woman's body image enhancement and psychological well-being. Although post-mastectomy radiation (PMRT) significantly improves the outcome of patients with high-risk breast cancer (BC), PMRT after BR may affect cosmetic outcomes and may compromise the original goal of improving quality of life (QoL). With the lack of practical guidelines, it seems essential to work on a consensus and provide some "expert agreements" to offer patients the best option for PMRT after BR. We report a global "expert agreement" that results from a critical review of the literature on BR and PMRT during the 6th international multidisciplinary breast conference in March 2023.

Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complication Profiles of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications of distinct implant-based breast reconstruction modality for patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT).

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted on breast cancer patients with stage II-III disease who performed implant-based breast reconstruction following with PMRT between September 2016 and April 2022. The patients were categorized into two matched groups: (1) patients receiving prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) or (2) subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) followed by PMRT. Following reconstruction, the patients were further compared for PMRT with the tissue expander (PMRT-TE) versus PMRT with permanent implant (PMRT-PI). PROs were measured with BREAST-Q questionnaire. Early and late complications were recorded and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 55 eligible patients were recruited. Patients who underwent PBR reported significantly higher satisfaction with breasts scores (P = 0.003) compared with the SBR group. The PMRT-TE group had higher satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.001) but lower physical well-being (P = 0.029) scores compared with PMRT-PI group. Moreover, patients in SBR cohort had a higher risk of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) (20.5% vs 6.3%) and implant dislocation (48.7% vs 12.5%) than patients in PBR cohort. Patients in PMRT-PI group had a slightly higher rate of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) than PMRT-TE group (20.8% vs 12.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

PBR was associated with lower rates of late complications, especially for implant dislocation, and higher satisfaction with breasts scores compared to SBR. In addition, compared to PMRT-TE with PMRT-PI, patients in PMRT-TE cohort reported superior PROs of satisfaction with breasts.

One-stop autologous breast reconstruction: A safe and effective cost-saving pathway

INTRODUCTION

Patients undergoing autologous breast reconstruction usually require further operations as part of their reconstructive journey. This involves contralateral breast symmetrization and nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction. Restrained access to elective operating space led us to implement a one-stop breast reconstruction pathway.

METHODS

Patients undergoing contemporaneous contralateral breast symmetrization and immediate NAC reconstruction with free nipple grafts between July 2020 and June 2021 were identified. A retrospective review of our prospectively maintained database was conducted, to retrieve surgical notes, postoperative complications, and length of inpatient stay. A cost analysis was performed considering savings from contralateral symmetrization.

RESULTS

A total of 50 eligible cases were identified, which had unilateral one-stop breast reconstructions. Complication rates and length of stay were not affected by this approach, with only one free flap being lost for this cohort. This approach resulted in £181,000 being saved for our service over a calendar year.

DISCUSSION

A one-stop breast reconstruction pathway has proven to be safe and effective in our unit. During these uncertain times, it has streamlined the management of eligible patients, while releasing capacity for other elective operations. Patients avoid having to wait for secondary procedures, finishing their reconstructive pathway earlier. We plan to continue providing this service which has shown to be beneficial clinically and financially.

Multimodality Imaging of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction Techniques, Complications, and Tumor Recurrence

For women undergoing mastectomy, breast reconstruction can be performed by using implants or autologous tissue flaps. Mastectomy options include skin- and nipple-sparing techniques. Implant-based reconstruction can be performed with saline or silicone implants. Various autologous pedicled or free tissue flap reconstruction methods based on different tissue donor sites are available. The aesthetic outcomes of implant- and flap-based reconstructions can be improved with oncoplastic surgery, including autologous fat graft placement and nipple-areolar complex reconstruction. The authors provide an update on recent advances in implant reconstruction techniques and contemporary expanded options for autologous tissue flap reconstruction as it relates to imaging modalities. As breast cancer screening is not routinely performed in this clinical setting, tumor recurrence after mastectomy and reconstruction is often detected by palpation at physical examination. Most local recurrences occur within the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Diagnostic breast imaging continues to have a critical role in confirmation of disease recurrence. Knowledge of the spectrum of benign and abnormal imaging appearances in the reconstructed breast is important for postoperative evaluation of patients, including recognition of early and late postsurgical complications and breast cancer recurrence. The authors provide an overview of multimodality imaging of the postmastectomy reconstructed breast, as well as an update on screening guidelines and recommendations for this unique patient population. ©RSNA, 2024 Test Your Knowledge questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.

Premastectomy Radiotherapy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Premastectomy radiotherapy (PreMRT) is a new treatment sequence to avoid the adverse effects of radiotherapy on the final breast reconstruction while achieving the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction (IMBR).

Objective

To evaluate outcomes among patients who received PreMRT and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) followed by mastectomy and IMBR.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This was a phase 2 single-center randomized clinical trial conducted between August 3, 2018, and August 2, 2022, evaluating the feasibility and safety of PreMRT and RNI (including internal mammary lymph nodes). Patients with cT0-T3, N0-N3b breast cancer and a recommendation for radiotherapy were eligible.

Intervention

This trial evaluated outcomes after PreMRT followed by mastectomy and IMBR. Patients were randomized to receive either hypofractionated (40.05 Gy/15 fractions) or conventionally fractionated (50 Gy/25 fractions) RNI.

Main Outcome and Measures

The primary outcome was reconstructive failure, defined as complete autologous flap loss. Demographic, treatment, and outcomes data were collected, and associations between multiple variables and outcomes were evaluated. Analysis was performed on an intent-to-treat basis.

Results

Fifty patients were enrolled. Among 49 evaluable patients, the median age was 48 years (range, 31-72 years), and 46 patients (94%) received neoadjuvant systemic therapy. Twenty-five patients received 50 Gy in 25 fractions to the breast and 45 Gy in 25 fractions to regional nodes, and 24 patients received 40.05 Gy in 15 fractions to the breast and 37.5 Gy in 15 fractions to regional nodes, including internal mammary lymph nodes. Forty-eight patients underwent mastectomy with IMBR, at a median of 23 days (IQR, 20-28.5 days) after radiotherapy. Forty-one patients had microvascular autologous flap reconstruction, 5 underwent latissimus dorsi pedicled flap reconstruction, and 2 had tissue expander placement. There were no complete autologous flap losses, and 1 patient underwent tissue expander explantation. Eight of 48 patients (17%) had mastectomy skin flap necrosis of the treated breast, of whom 1 underwent reoperation. During follow-up (median, 29.7 months [range, 10.1-65.2 months]), there were no locoregional recurrences or distant metastasis.

Conclusions and Relevance

This randomized clinical trial found PreMRT and RNI followed by mastectomy and microvascular autologous flap IMBR to be feasible and safe. Based on these results, a larger randomized clinical trial of hypofractionated vs conventionally fractionated PreMRT has been started (NCT05774678).

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02912312.

Breast reconstruction after mastectomy

Patients requesting breast reconstruction after mastectomy is an increasing group at plastic- and breast surgery departments in Denmark. This review summarises the present surgical techniques for reconstruction with/without postoperative chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy. These surgical techniques are continuously updated. The most determining factor when selecting a reconstructive technique, is postoperative radiation therapy. Each patient is unique, and an individual assessment is made when planning surgery. The concept of a "babysitter implant" is currently being investigated in Denmark and might be an option for selected patients.

[Updated indications and techniques for immediate breast reconstruction, particularly in the case of adjuvant radiotherapy]

In 2023, 62,000 patients were diagnosed with breast cancer in France. Every year, 22,000 mastectomies are performed. Breast reconstruction (BR) should be an integral part of breast cancer management. Yet the MR rate in France is only 28% within 3 years of mastectomy, of which 14% are immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The number of contraindications to RMI has steadily declined over the last few decades, although some of them remain definitive, such as inflammatory cancer (T4d). Today, many specialists involved in the management of breast cancer consider that IBR can be proposed in cases where adjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy is indicated, if it is not expected to delay carcinological management. The surgical team must then inform the patient of all available BR techniques. If a team does not offer a particular technique, the patient should be referred to a center that does. In all cases, the proposal for curative and reparative treatment should be the subject of a multidisciplinary discussion involving, in particular, a surgeon, a radiotherapist and a medical oncologist. When adjuvant radiotherapy is indicated, the patient must be informed of the increased risk of complications and deterioration of the aesthetic result. In this indication, RMI by prosthesis is a validated technique. However, if the patient has a history of radiotherapy, autologous techniques should be preferred. In a context of shared decision-making, the choice of whether or not to undergo MR and the type of technique must ultimately be made by the patient, in agreement with the multidisciplinary team.

The impact of post-mastectomy radiation timing on overall outcomes of autologous free-flap breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The optimal timing of post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in autologous breast reconstruction is controversial. Our study compares overall reconstructive outcomes in patients who received post-mastectomy radiation therapy either before or after the autologous flap.

METHODS

A single-center retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent free flap breast reconstruction and post-mastectomy radiation from January 2004 through January 2021. Demographic, intraoperative, and post-operative variables were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 452 free flaps were identified, and 82 underwent PMRT. 59.8% were radiated with an expander prior to free flap surgery (PreFlap), and 40.2% flaps underwent PMRT (PostFlap). PostFlap patients were significantly younger (43.0 vs. 47.9 years, p = .016). There were no significant differences in free flap outcomes between the two cohorts including thrombosis, venous congestion, flap loss, takebacks, fat necrosis, seroma, or infection. Mastectomy skin flap necrosis was significantly higher in the PostFlap cohort (9.1% vs. 0%, p = .032), but nipple necrosis rates did not differ. There were no significant differences in number or need for revision surgeries, fat necrosis, or fat grafting between groups. However, there were significantly more total reconstructive complications, including infection and wound breakdown, experienced by the PreFlap cohort (46.9% vs. 24.2%, p = .038).

CONCLUSIONS

Timing of PMRT did not impact free flap outcomes, but those who had the expander radiated experienced significantly more complications overall. For the 34.7% of patients in the preFlap group who planned for autologous reconstruction form initial consultation, radiation after the flap may have improved their overall outcomes. As added complications cause delays in cancer therapy and final reconstruction, our results suggest that PMRT of the flap when possible may improve the overall experience for breast cancer patients.

Surgical and patient-reported outcomes in an Asian female population with or without adjuvant radiotherapy after immediate free perforator flap breast reconstruction: A retrospective review

Background

The majority of English literature has reported on the somewhat conflicted outcomes of the effect of radiotherapy on immediate breast reconstruction. However, data specifically related to patients of Asian descent has been scarce. This retrospective study aims to shed light on this topic to aid in the management of this group of patients.

Methods

All patients who received immediate free perforator flap-based breast reconstruction under a single surgeon over a 10-year period were included in the study. Patient characteristics, oncological and surgical data were collected. Patients were divided into post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) and non-PMRT groups. The final aesthetic outcome was assessed by a surgeon-reported outcome questionnaire. Patient satisfaction and psychological outcomes were assessed using validated patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaire (BREAST-Q), breast reconstruction, and postoperative module.

Results

A total of 101 women, with an average age of 44.7 ± 8.4 underwent perforator flap-based reconstruction. Fifteen patients received PMRT, with remaining 86 patients in the non-PMRT group. The mean duration of follow-up was over 5 years (p = 0.514). The recurrence rate was acceptable in the PMRT group (3/15, p = 0.129). There were no significant differences in complication rates between the two groups (p = 1.000). The aesthetic outcomes were comparable (p = 0.342). PRO appears to be lower in the PMRT group.

Conclusions

Immediate breast reconstruction with PMRT in the local patient cohort is oncologically safe, acceptable complication profile, revision rate, and aesthetic outcome. PRO showed lower scores in several categories, which differ from normative data generated in the Western population. Further studies will need to examine the confounding effects of radiation in this specific population.

[Update and Trends in Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy]

Due to refinements in operating techniques, autologous breast reconstruction has become part of standard care. It has become more difficult to advise patients due to the expansion of oncologic options for mastectomy, radiation therapy and the variety of reconstructive techniques. The goal of reconstruction is to achieve oncologically clear margins and a long-term aesthetically satisfactory result with a high quality of life. Immediate reconstruction preserves the skin of the breast and its natural form and prevents the psychological trauma associated with mastectomy. However, secondary reconstructions often have a higher satisfaction, since here no restitutio ad integrum is assumed. Alloplastic, i. e., implant-based, breast reconstruction and autologous breast reconstruction are complementary techniques. This article provides an overview of current options for breast reconstruction including patients' satisfaction and quality of life following breast reconstruction. Although immediate reconstruction is still the preferred choice of most patients and surgeons, delayed reconstruction does not appear to compromise clinical or patient-reported outcomes. Recent refinements in surgical techniques and autologous breast reconstruction include stacked-flaps, as well as microsurgical nerve coaptation to restore sensitivity, which lead to improved outcomes and quality of life. Nowadays Skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomy, accompanied by improved implant quality, allows immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction as well as reemergence of the prepectoral implantation. The choice of breast reconstruction depends on the type of mastectomy, necessary radiation, individual risk factors, as well as the patient's habitus and wishes. Overall, recent developments in breast reconstruction led to an increase in patient satisfaction, quality of life and aesthetic outcome with oncological safety.

From Risk Assessment to Intervention: A Systematic Review of Thrombosis in Plastic Surgery

Thromboembolism is a feared complication in plastic surgery and is linked to higher rates of morbidity and mortality. Despite extensive research, there is a lack of consistency between recommendations and clinical protocols to be implemented pre and post-surgery to reduce the incidence of thromboembolism. A systematic literature review was conducted using Pubmed and Scopus databases to determine the risk factors, screening methods, and existing treatment models for thromboembolism prevention. Articles in non-English languages were excluded. Analysis indicated that predominant risk factors include age (>35), elevated body mass index, coagulation disorders, smoking, estrogen therapies, genetic predisposition, vascular endothelium damage, stasis, and use of general anesthesia in patients with a history of cancer. Implementation of a proper prophylactic protocol is dependent on understanding the interplay between the aforementioned risk factors and the utilization of well-defined, evidence-based guidelines, such as the 2005 Caprini Risk Assessment Model and ultrasound surveillance. The literature review revealed that mechanical prophylaxis is the primary prevention method, followed by thromboprophylaxis for patients with higher Caprini scores. Plastic surgeons often underestimate the present risk stratification tools available for the prophylactic intervention of thromboembolism due to the fear of bleeding or hematoma complications postoperatively. In summary, this literature review emphasizes the importance of plastic surgeons selecting protocols that is inclusive of the patient's risk profile to yield a reduced risk of thromboembolism.

Racial Disparities in Breast Reconstruction at a Comprehensive Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION

Breast reconstruction after a mastectomy is an important component of breast cancer care that improves the quality of life in breast cancer survivors. African American women are less likely to receive breast reconstruction than Caucasian women. The purpose of this study was to further investigate the reconstruction disparities we previously reported at a comprehensive cancer center by assessing breast reconstruction rates, patterns, and predictors by race.

METHODS

Data were obtained from women treated with definitive mastectomy between 2000 and 2012. Sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were compared between African American and Caucasian women, and logistic regression was used to identify significant predictors of reconstruction by race.

RESULTS

African American women had significantly larger proportions of public insurance, aggressive tumors, unilateral mastectomies, and modified radical mastectomies. African American women had a significantly lower reconstruction rate (35% vs. 49%, p < 0.01) and received a larger proportion of autologous reconstruction (13% vs. 7%, p < 0.01) compared to Caucasian women. The receipt of adjuvant radiation therapy was a significant predictor of breast reconstruction in Caucasian but not African American women.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified breast reconstruction disparities in rate and type of reconstruction. These disparities may be due to racial differences in sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. The predictors of breast reconstruction varied by race, suggesting that the mechanisms underlying breast reconstruction may vary in African American women. Future research should take a target approach to examine the relative contributions of sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment determinants of the breast reconstruction disparities in African American women.

"Immediate versus delayed autologous breast reconstruction in patients undergoing post-mastectomy radiation therapy: A paradigm shift"

BACKGROUND

While negative impacts of radiation on breast reconstruction have been well accepted, timing of autologous breast reconstruction in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is still evolving. This study aims to address the dilemma of breast reconstruction timing in patients receiving PMRT.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed evaluating patients who underwent PMRT and autologous breast reconstruction. Postoperative complication and revision rates were compared.

RESULTS

Thirty-six immediate (immediate breast reconstruction [IBR]) and 89 delayed reconstructions (delayed breast reconstruction [DBR]) were included with comparable patient characteristics between groups. Overall complication rates were not significantly different, or when separately assessing for surgical site infections, wound dehiscence, fat necrosis, or substantial volume loss. No free flaps were lost in either group. Revision rates were significantly lower in the IBR group (p = 0.02). DBR resulted in appreciably larger volumes of fat grafting to the therapeutically reconstructed breast (p = 0.01) and more contralateral mastopexies (p = 0.02). No significant difference was observed in fat necrosis excision, breast reduction, or need for secondary flap reconstruction or prosthetic use for volume loss.

CONCLUSIONS

IBR in the setting of PMRT does not result in higher rates of complications and requires fewer overall revisions, making it a compelling option for patients undergoing PMRT.

Breast cancer recurrence after immediate and delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision‐making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant‐based PMBR separately.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta‐analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I²‐statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects.

Results

Fifty‐five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03–0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00–0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Conclusions

Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR.

Lay summery

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial.

Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision‐making complex.

This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR.

The oncological safety of autologous fat grafting: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective

To present a systematic review of the literature and a meta-analysis evaluating the oncological safety of autologous fat grafting (AFG).

Summary background data: AFG for breast reconstruction presents difficulties during follow-up radiological exams, and the oncological potential of grafted fat is uncertain. Previous studies confirmed that the fatty tissue could be transferred under a good condition suitable would not interfere with mammographic follow-up, although the issue of oncological safety remains.

Methods

We reviewed the literature published until 01/18/2021. The outcomes were overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and local recurrence (LR). We included studies that evaluated women with breast cancer who undergone surgery followed by reconstruction with AFG. We synthesized data using the inverse variance method on the log-HR (log of the hazard ratio) scale for time-to-event outcomes using RevMan. We assessed heterogeneity using the Chi² and I² statistics.

Results

Fifteen studies evaluating 8541 participants were included. The hazard ratios (HR) could be extracted from four studies, and there was no difference in OS between the AFG group and control (HR 0.9, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.54, p = 0.71, I² = 58%, moderate certainty evidence), and publication bias was not detected. The HR for DFS could be extracted from six studies, and there was no difference between the AFG group and control (HR 1.01, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.38, p = 0.96, I² = 0%, moderate certainty evidence). The HR for LR could be extracted from ten studies, and there was no difference between the AFG group and control (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.12, p = 0.43, I² = 1%, moderate certainty evidence).

Conclusion

According to the current evidence, AFG is a safe technique of breast reconstruction for patients that have undergone BC surgery and did not affect OS, DFS, or LR.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09485-5.

Interventions for Radiation-Induced Fibrosis in Patients with Breast Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-analyses

Purpose

Radiation therapy can affect normal tissues in patients with breast cancer, causing adverse effects such as fibrosis. Although there are several interventions for radiation-induced fibrosis, the efficacy of these procedures is still unclear. The purpose of this review is to evaluate the efficacy of interventions for radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer.

Methods and Materials

This is a systematic review of randomized clinical trials. Studies that compared any intervention for fibrosis to another intervention, placebo, or no intervention were included. Outcomes assessed were fibrosis, adverse events, quality of life, treatment adherence, pain, and functionality.

Results

A total of 2501 publications were found, and 7 studies were selected because they met the inclusion criteria. The interventions for fibrosis were pentoxifylline and vitamin E, grape seed extract, kinesiotherapy, and endermotherapy. The results showed great heterogeneity in the treatment protocols for radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer and in their evaluation metrics. The meta-analyses showed no benefit in using pentoxifylline and vitamin E compared with placebo or no intervention (standardized mean difference: −0.30; 95% confidence interval, −0.79 to 0.20; P = .24 [very low evidence]) compared with placebo and vitamin E (standardized mean difference: −0.09; 95% confidence interval, −0.66 to 0.49; P = .77 [moderate evidence]), respectively, assessed by the Late Effects Normal Tissue Task Force–Subjective, Objective, Management, and Analytic (LENT-SOMA) scoring scale.

Conclusions

The effectiveness of these interventions for the treatment of radiation-induced fibrosis in patients with breast cancer could not be determined. Although isolated studies show significant results favorable to the experimental groups, caution should be exercised in these findings because of the small number, small sample size, and high risk of bias presented by some of the included studies, which makes the recommendation for clinical practice still weak.