Breast-related and body-related quality of life following autologous breast reconstruction is superior to implant-based breast reconstruction - A long-term follow-up study

Aesthetic Evaluation and Validation: Umbilicus Reconstruction after DIEP Flap

BACKGROUND

 The most common method for autologous breast reconstruction is the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. The umbilicus can be managed in various ways, including re-inset, neoumbilicus, and umbilectomy without reconstruction. This study evaluated the aesthetic differences in umbilicus reconstruction choice and variation in patients' postoperative satisfaction with their abdomen.

METHODS

 A retrospective review of 1,019 patients treated with DIEP flap breast reconstruction between August 2009 and January 2022 was conducted. Patients were stratified by management of the umbilicus: preservation and re-inset of the native umbilicus, umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction, and umbilectomy with no reconstruction. A crowdsourced survey was created to assess the aesthetic preference of each photograph using a Likert scale.

RESULTS

 There were 1,063 responses to the umbilicus preference crowd source survey. Patients who had delayed umbilicus reconstruction after umbilectomy were rated to be significantly more attractive (4.397 ± 1.697) than both preservation of the native umbilicus (4.176 ± 1.669) and lack of the umbilicus (3.994 ± 1.733; p < 0.001 and <0.001, respectively). In an analysis of the BREAST-Q scores, delayed reconstruction patients had a similar change across measures when compared to the re-inset group. The delayed group had a significantly higher change in overall satisfaction and well-being with abdomen when compared with the no reconstruction group (p = 0.006 and 0.027, respectively).

CONCLUSION

 This study demonstrates that umbilectomy with delayed reconstruction yields a significantly higher aesthetic rating and comparable patient satisfaction when compared to re-inset of the umbilicus.

PlasmaBlade versus Electrocautery for Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap Harvesting in Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Clinical Outcome Study

(1) Background: DIEP-based breast reconstruction necessitates wide undermining at the abdominal donor site, creating large wound areas. Flap harvesting is usually conducted using electrosurgical dissection devices. This study sought to compare the clinical outcomes in patients after using the PEAK PlasmaBlade (PPB) versus monopolar electrocautery (MPE). (2) Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 128 patients with DIEP-based breast reconstruction. Patient characteristics and information on the postoperative course were collected and a comparative evaluation was conducted. (3) Results: The MPE group exhibited significantly (p* = 0.0324) higher abdominal drainage volume (351.11 ± 185.96 mL) compared to the PPB group (279.38 ± 183.38 mL). A subgroup analysis demonstrated that PPB significantly reduced postoperative wound fluid in patients with BMI > 30 kg/m2 (p* = 0.0284), without prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p** = 0.0041), and among non-smokers (p = 0.0046). Furthermore, postoperative pain was significantly (p**** < 0.0001) lower in the PPB cohort. (4) Conclusions: This study confirms the non-inferiority of the PEAK PlasmaBlade to conventional electrocautery for abdominal flap harvesting. The PPB demonstrated advantages, notably reduced drainage volume and lower postoperative pain levels. Recognizing patient subsets that benefit more from the PPB highlights the importance of personalized device selection based on patient characteristics.

Serial Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes of Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Direct-to-Implant Versus Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap

BACKGROUND

Direct-to-implant (DTI) and deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flaps are the two most common methods of immediate breast reconstruction. This study aimed to compare patient-reported outcomes between the two methods and to evaluate whether outcomes change over time.

METHODS

The data of patients who underwent immediate breast reconstruction using DTI or DIEP flaps between July 2017 and October 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. Patients who completed the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module at 6 months and > 12 months after reconstruction were analyzed. Mann-Whitney and Wilcoxon signed-rank test were used to compare outcome between DTI and DIEP groups, and serial comparisons were performed.

RESULTS

Of 375 patients included in the analysis, 146 patients completed questionnaires > 1 year of follow-up (20.79 ± 8.55 months). The DTI and DIEP groups had 102 (69.9%) and 44 (30.1%) patients, respectively. There were no intergroup differences in the mean scores representing any of the domains at 6 postoperative months. After > 1 year of follow-up, patients who underwent DIEP-flap reconstruction had greater satisfaction with their breast reconstructions (p < 0.001) and greater satisfaction with their overall outcomes (p < 0.001). In the DTI group, satisfaction scores did not change over time in any of the domains. In the DIEP group, however, the mean scores reflecting satisfaction with the breast (p = 0.001), overall outcome (p = 0.045), psychosocial well-being (p = 0.015), and sexual well-being (p = 0.042) significantly increased over long-term follow-up relative to the scores at 6 postoperative months.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-reported outcomes improved over time in association with DIEP reconstructions, reflecting higher satisfaction levels than those associated with DTI reconstruction.

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 .

Patients' Satisfaction After Breast Reconstruction Surgery Using Autologous versus Implants: A Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer is a common disease that affects women globally and causes physical and emotional challenges. Breast reconstructive surgery aims to restore the shape of the breast after a mastectomy. Two common approaches used today are tissue-based or autologous and implant-based reconstruction. Autologous breast reconstruction has the advantage of being more affordable, but the resulting shape is less attractive. At the same time, the implant technique produces a more pleasing shape at a more expensive cost.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the level of patients' satisfaction after breast reconstruction using the implant technique with the autologous technique using the Breast-Q questionnaire.

METHODS

This research was a meta-analytic study to compare patients' satisfaction levels with breast reconstruction using the autologous technique compared with the implant technique. We searched several research articles from PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from 2014 to 2023. Then, we conducted an analysis using Revman 5.4. The results of the study were presented in a forest plot diagram.

RESULTS

From the search results, there were 3980 studies. Then, exclusion and inclusion were carried out, and the results obtained were 16 research articles. Of the 16 studies, analysis was then carried out, and the results obtained were satisfaction in breast patients with a sample size of 7284. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.55 (95% CI 0.41-0.68) p < 0.00001. Satisfaction with the reconstruction results with a sample size of 2935. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.48 (95% CI 0.28-0.69) p < 0.00001. Patients' sexual satisfaction with a sample size of 7149. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.27 (95% CI 0.17-0.37) p < 0.00001. Patients' satisfaction with nipple shapes with a sample of 426. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.22 (95% CI -0.00-0.44) p = 0.06. Patients' satisfaction with plastic surgeons with a sample size of 272. The standard result of the mean difference was 0.52 (95% CI 0.25-0.80) p= 0.0002.

CONCLUSION

The autologous breast reconstruction technique is better than the implant-based reconstruction technique in terms of patient satisfaction with the breast, reconstruction outcome, sexual satisfaction, nipple shapes, and plastic surgeons based on the Breast-Q questionnaire. The findings of this comprehensive study indicate that breast cancer survivors who choose autologous reconstruction have higher levels of satisfaction across multiple domains than those who decide implant-based reconstruction.

Key factors in the decision-making process for mastectomy alone or breast reconstruction: A qualitative analysis

Breast cancer is the most common cancer to affect New Zealand women. Women diagnosed face several decisions regarding surgical treatment, including whether to undergo lumpectomy, mastectomy, or breast reconstruction. Reconstructive surgery adds an additional layer of complexity, with several reconstructive options, each associated with differing surgical and recovery times. Furthermore, surgical decisions are often made under time-pressure and significant diagnostic distress, therefore provision of good information to support decision-making is crucial to adequately inform women of their options. We interviewed 24 women who had undergone breast surgery within the preceding 12 months to assess the key factors leading to their decision to opt for their chosen surgical procedure. Interviews revealed that decision-making was complex and involved multiple factors. Women were ultimately confronted with assessing feminine identity versus survival. Whether opting for breast reconstruction or not, women were fearful of what surgery would involve and how their reconstructed breast or mastectomy scar might look following surgery. Shared decision-making between patient and clinician can mitigate this fear and provide women with a sense of autonomy over their health decisions. Provision of visual depictions of surgical outcomes was not routinely provided to those interviewed but was expressed as important to help women manage surgical expectations. Therefore our findings support the multi-modal presentation of diagnostic and treatment information to support decision-making. Likewise, women reported feeling unsupported in their decision not to undergo breast reconstruction, suggesting a need to develop resources to provide women with positive discussions about 'going flat'.

Imaging findings after a total reconstructed breast with autologous fat transfer: what the radiologist needs to know

Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is an upcoming technique for total breast reconstruction. Consequently, radiological imaging of women with an AFT reconstructed breast will increase in the coming years, yet radiological experience and evidence after AFT is limited.

The surgical procedure of AFT and follow-up with imaging modalities including mammography (MG), ultrasound (US), and MRI in patients with a total breast reconstruction with AFT are summarized to illustrate the radiological normal and suspicious findings for malignancy.

Imaging after a total breast reconstruction with AFT appears to be based mostly on benign imaging findings with an overall low biopsy rate. As higher volumes are injected in this technique, the risk for the onset of fat necrosis increases. Imaging findings most often are related to fat necrosis after AFT. On MG, fat necrosis can mostly be seen as oil cysts. The occurrence of a breast seroma after total breast reconstruction with AFT is an unfavourable outcome and may require special treatment. Fat deposition in the pectoral muscle is a previously unknown, but benign entity. Although fat necrosis is a benign entity, it can mimic breast cancer (recurrence).

In symptomatic women after total breast reconstruction with AFT, MG and US can be considered as first diagnostic modalities. Breast MRI can be used as a problem-solving tool during later stage. Future studies should investigate the most optimal follow-up strategy, including different imaging modalities, in patients treated with AFT for total breast reconstruction.

The influence of personality on patient-reported outcomes in women undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Despite the lack of hard evidence for causality, some women attribute their systemic complaints to their silicone breast implants. Personality and psychological distress are associated with the development of medically unexplained symptoms. It could be hypothesized that these psychological factors are related to the development of breast implant illness (BII). In a previous study, we found a relationship between personality traits and BII-related complaints in patients with cosmetic breast implants. This association may also exist in patients with implant-based breast reconstruction.

OBJECTIVES

This cross-sectional study evaluated the association between personality, self-reported health complaints, and health- and breast-related quality of life (QoL) in women with implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODS

Women who underwent breast reconstruction between January 2015 and December 2018 in either the Maastricht University Medical Center or Zuyderland Medical Center were invited to participate in this study. Participants were asked to complete a physical complaint score form and the BREAST-Q, SF-36, and EPQ-RSS questionnaires through an online survey. The association between outcomes was analyzed with multivariate linear regression.

RESULTS

A total of 118 women completed the questionnaires. Social desirability and extroversion were predominant personality traits. Neuroticism levels were comparable with normative data. Neuroticism correlated significantly with health status and breast-related QoL. Health-related QoL had the strongest correlation with neuroticism (β = -2.93, β = -3.41, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

This study suggests that personality, and neuroticism in particular, may contribute to the development of medically unexplained complaints in women with implant-based reconstruction. The influence of personality on BII needs to be further investigated in large prospective studies.

Patient-reported outcomes: A primer for plastic surgeons

Surgical care today is no longer evaluated only on clinical outcomes but also on holistic patient wellbeing. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are a representation of the patient's perspective on their results and wellbeing. The aim of this review is to establish PROs as the center of healthcare and plastic surgery, to delineate important PROs in plastic surgery practice and research, to discuss the future of PROs within our discipline, and to encourage surgeons to incorporate PROs into their practice. PROs are an important parallel of clinical outcomes in that they can use the patient's perspective to 1) support clinical findings, 2) detect differences in care when there are no clear clinical differences, 3) track progress longitudinally, and 4) support systemic improvements in healthcare. Plastic surgery as a field is naturally aligned with PROs because, as a discipline, we focus on patient form and function. The emerging forefronts of plastic surgery such as lymphedema care, gender-affirming care, peripheral nerve surgery, migraine surgery, and breast implant illness are critically dependent on PROs. In the next decade, we predict that there will be a continued proliferation of robust PRO measures and integration into healthcare delivery. Outcomes research in surgery should continue to evolve as surgeons provide increasingly more benefits to improve patient wellbeing. Plastic surgeons must continue to play a prominent role in the future of PROs.

Sensory recovery and the role of innervated flaps in autologous breast reconstruction-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Continuing (micro)surgical developments result in satisfactory aesthetic outcomes after autologous breast reconstruction. However, sensation recovers poorly and remains a source of dissatisfaction and potential harm. Sensory nerve coaptation is a promising technique to improve sensation in the reconstructed breast.

Methods

In this literature review an overview of current knowledge about sensory recovery in autologous breast reconstruction and the role of innervated flaps is presented. A thorough PubMed search was conducted, using the terms "autologous breast reconstruction", "innervated" and "sensation".

Key Content and Findings

The breast skin is predominantly innervated by the second until sixth intercostal nerve. Some nerves can occasionally be spared during mastectomy, especially during nipple-sparing mastectomy, but transection of sensory nerves is inevitable and leads to impaired sensation. Besides unpleasant, this is unanticipated by patients and negatively influences quality of life. Coaptation between the third anterior intercostal nerve and a sensory nerve from the donor site improves sensory recovery. The donor site and nerve vary, depending on the flap type chosen. The sensory nerves from the commonly used abdominal DIEP flap originate from the 7th until 12th thoracic spinal nerves. Non-abdominal flaps, including the back, buttocks, or thigh area, can also be accompanied with a sensory nerve. Nerve coaptation can be performed directly, or by using grafts or conduits to obtain tensionless repair if necessary. It can be utilized in both immediate as well as delayed autologous breast reconstruction. No adverse outcomes of nerve coaptation have been described. And, most importantly: improved sensory recovery improves patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Conclusions

Restoring sensation is, besides restoring aesthetic appearance, an important goal in breast reconstruction. Current evidence unambiguously demonstrates superiority of innervated flaps compared to non-innervated flaps. Sensory recovery initiates earlier and it approaches normal sensation more closely in innervated flaps, without associated risks or extensive increase in operating time. This improves patient satisfaction and quality of life. It is, therefore, a valuable addition to autologous breast reconstruction. These findings encourage implementation of sensory nerve coaptation in standard clinical care.

Autologous Reconstruction After Failed Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Multifactorial Outcome Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Failure of an implant-based breast reconstruction often requires a change to an autologous procedure (salvage autologous breast reconstruction [Salv-ABR]). The aim of this study was to compare surgical and patient-reported outcomes of Salv-ABR to immediate or delayed-immediate ABR (I/DI-ABR), which has hardly been addressed in the existing literature.

METHODS

All patients undergoing Salv- or I/DI-ABR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate in this study. Complication rates, the aesthetic outcome (5-point Likert scale), and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and -BR23, Breast-Q, Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale) were compared between both procedures.

RESULTS

Seventy patients participated in the study (Salv-ABR: n = 23; mean ± SD age, 53.5 ± 9.1 years; follow-up, 28.6 ± 18.5 month; I/DI-ABR: n = 45, mean ± SD age: 50.2 ± 7.3 years; follow-up, 32.8 ± 18.5 month). Main indication for Salv-ABR was a major capsular contracture (n = 14 [60.1%]). Early unplanned reoperation rates were significantly increased in the Salv-ABR (56.5% vs 14.9%; P < 0.01). Patients with I/DI-ABR showed a significantly improved overall aesthetic outcome (2.7 ± 0.9 vs 3.3 ± 0.7; P < 0.01) and scored significantly higher in several subscales of EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 (Global Health Status, Role Functioning, Body Image; P < 0.05) and the Breast-Q (Psychosocial Well-being, Satisfaction with Breast; P < 0.05) compared with patients with Salv-ABR.

CONCLUSIONS

Salvage ABR is associated with a higher complication rate, compromised aesthetic outcome, and quality of life compared with I/DI-ABR. This should be considered and discussed with the patient when planning any kind of reconstructive breast surgery.

Trends and issues in clinical research on satisfaction and quality of life after mastectomy and breast reconstruction: a 5-year scoping review

Breast reconstruction (BR) aims to improve the satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) of breast cancer survivors. Clinical studies using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can therefore provide relevant information to the patients and support decision-making. This scoping review was conducted to analyze recent trends in world regions, methods used, and factors investigated. The literature search was conducted in August 2022. Databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched for relevant English-language studies published from 2017 to 2022. Studies involving women with breast cancer who underwent BR after mastectomy and investigated PROs after BR using BR-specific scales were included. Data on the country, publication year, study design, PRO measures (PROMs) used, time points of surveys, and research themes were collected. In total, 147 articles met the inclusion criteria. BREAST-Q was the most widely used, contributing to the increase in the number and diversification of studies in this area. Such research has been conducted mainly in North America and Europe and is still developing in Asia and other regions. The research themes involved a wide range of clinical and patient factors in addition to surgery, which could be influenced by research methods, time since surgery, and even cultural differences. Recent BR-specific PROMs have led to a worldwide development of research on factors that affect satisfaction and QOL after BR. PRO after BR may be influenced by local cultural and social features, and it would be necessary to accumulate data in each region to draw clinically useful conclusion.

The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Partner involvement in the decision-making process concerning breast reconstruction (BR) after a breast cancer diagnosis may be very supportive for the patient. So far, no study evaluates partner satisfaction with the outcome after BR and the relationship to patient satisfaction. The aim of this study was to assess and compare partner satisfaction of BR with autologous tissue (ABR) and prosthetic implants (IBR), respectively, and compare it to patient-reported outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients undergoing ABR and IBR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate with their partners. Patient and partner satisfaction with breast reconstruction, overall outcome as well as patient's perceived and self-reported psychosocial well-being were evaluated using the Breast-Q and a modified partner questionnaire, respectively.

RESULTS

Fifty-three couples participated (IBR: n=30, ABR: n = 23). Patient and partner satisfaction with breast (r = 0.552), outcome (r = 0.465) as well as patient's perceived and self-report psychosocial well-being (r = 0.495) were highly correlated with partners scoring significantly higher (p<0.001). In terms of partner satisfaction, both reconstructive procedures achieved satisfactory results. ABR scored higher in terms of softness of breast and how natural the breast feels to touch whereas IBR was rated superior evaluating the breast size.

CONCLUSION

Both reconstructive procedures achieve satisfactory results in terms partner satisfaction whereas patient's psychosocial well-being was highly overestimated by their partners. Hence, partner inclusion in the regular psycho-oncological support might further sensitize them of the high psychological burden of a breast cancer diagnosis and therefore stabilize patients private support system.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

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 .

Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction

The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific implant topographies. Of note, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has only been observed in response to textured surface implants. We hypothesize that reduction of SMI surface roughness causes less host response and, hence, better cosmetic outcomes with fewer complications for the patient. A total of 7 patients received the routinely used CPX^®4 breast expander (~60 µM Ra) and the novel SmoothSilk^® (~4 µM Ra), fixed prepectoral with a titanized mesh pocket and randomized to the left or right breast after bilateral prophylactic NSME (nipple-sparing mastectomy). We aimed to compare the postoperative outcome regarding capsule thickness, seroma formation, rippling, implant dislocation as well as comfortability and practicability. Our analysis shows that surface roughness is an influential parameter in controlling fibrotic implant encapsulation. Compared intra-individually for the first time in patients, our data confirm an improved biocompatibility with minor capsule formation around SmoothSilk^® implants with an average shell roughness of 4 µM and in addition an amplification of host response by titanized implant pockets.

Implant vs. autologous tissue-based breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the studies comparing surgical approaches in 55,455 patients

BACKGROUND

The choice of reconstruction type is of utmost importance in treating breast cancer. There are two major reconstructive pathways in this group of patients: autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess and compare IBR vs. ABR.

METHODS

A review of studies reporting the differences between the procedures was performed. The MEDLINE/PubMed, ScienceDirect, EMBASE, BIOSIS, SciELO, Scopus, and Web of Science databases were thoroughly searched in September 2021. The data concerning group characteristics, BREAST-Q scores, complication rates, length of stay (LOS), and costs were extracted. The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used for randomized studies, while Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment for Cohort Studies was used for other types of research.

RESULTS

Our meta-analysis included 32 studies (n = 55,455). We observed significantly better outcomes following ABR when it comes to esthetic satisfaction (mean difference [MD] -8.51; 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.70, -6.33; p<0.001) and satisfaction with the entire reconstructive treatment (MD -6.56; 95% CI -9.97, -3.14; p<0.001). Both methods appeared to be comparable in terms of safety, while the complication rates varied insignificantly between the groups (odds ratio [OR] 1.06; 95% CI 0.71, 1.59; p = 0.76). ABR seems to be correlated with significantly higher costs (standard mean difference [SMD] -0.69; 95% CI -1.21, -0.17; p = 0.010).

CONCLUSIONS

The results obtained from this evidence-based study will improve the understanding of the different clinical pathways that patients can be assigned to. The study emphasized the advantages and disadvantages of both methods.

Long-Term Results after Autologous Breast Reconstruction with DIEP versus PAP Flaps Based on Quality of Life and Aesthetic Outcome Analysis

(1) Background: This work aimed to conduct a comparative study, providing long-term data about patient-reported outcome measures and donor site scar assessments, as well as an aesthetic evaluation of the reconstructed breasts in patients with DIEP versus PAP flap breast reconstruction. (2) Methods: This prospective, single-center, matched cohort study included a total of 36 patients after DIEP and PAP flap breast reconstruction. The evaluation was carried out using the Breast-Q and POSAS questionnaire, as well as the Breast Aesthetic Scale for cosmetic analysis, by four plastic surgeons. (3) Results: The postoperative Breast-Q evaluation revealed no significant differences between both patient groups for the categories of the physical well-being of the donor site, the physical well-being of the breast, and satisfaction with the breast. A scar evaluation of the donor site region showed equivalent results for the thigh and abdomen regions, concerning the overall opinion of the patients and the observers. There was no significant difference between both methods of reconstruction for all aspects of breast aesthetics. (4) Conclusions: Similar results for donor site morbidity, scar quality, and the aesthetic outcome of the breasts in both the DIEP and PAP patient groups have been demonstrated. Hence, in those cases suitable for both types of reconstruction, the decision can be based on factors such as patients' lifestyles, leisure activities, and preferences.

Does Fitzpatrick Score Predict Flap Loss? Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction Outcomes of Varying Skin Color

The aim of this study was to seek evidence that patients with darker Fitzpatrick score skin tones are more susceptible to flap loss due to unsalvaged vascular compromise in autologous flap breast reconstruction.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study conducted on patients who underwent any type of autologous flap breast reconstruction performed by the two senior authors at an academic center between January 2010 and December 2021. The sole primary outcome variable was flap loss. Patient skin tone was assessed using the Fitzpatrick scale on clinical photographs of patients.

RESULTS

A total of 1115 pateints underwent autologous flap breast reconstruction, of which only 56 met both exclusion and inclusion criteria with 58 individual breasts being included in the final study population. The most common race of subjects was White (n = 33; 56.9%) while the most common Fitzpatrick score skin tone was type II (n = 22; 37.9%). The Cochran-Armitage test of trend showed a statistically significant linear trend, P = 0.006, with darker Fitzpatrick score skin tones associated with a higher proportion of flap loss in patients who had vascular compromise. A logistic regression showed that none of the predictor variables were significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with darker Fitzpatrick skin tones were associated with flap loss after vascular compromise. To prevent flap loss in patients who have darker Fitzpatrick score skin tones, more aggressive flap monitoring should be taken into consideration in the immediate postoperative setting.

Autologous vs. implant-based breast reconstruction after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy—A deeper insight considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes

Introduction

Autologous (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) represent the most common procedures after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy. This cross-sectional study is a comprehensive analysis of ABR and IBR considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes.

Patients and methods

Eligible patients underwent breast reconstruction (ABR and IBR) after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy between January 2014 and December 2020. Outcome parameters included quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer - EORTC - QLQ30, BR23, Breast-Q, CES-D), complication rates, aesthetic result, and breast sensitivity.

Results

108 patients participated in the study (IBR: n = 72, age 48.9 ± 9.9 years; ABR: n = 36, age: 46.6 ± 7.3 years). Mean follow-up was 27.1 ± 9.3 (IBR) and 34.9 ± 20.5 (ABR), respectively. IBR patients suffered significantly more often from major complications (30.6% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.01), while ABR patients underwent secondary procedures significantly more often to improve the aesthetic result (55.6% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.004). Unilateral reconstructions revealed superior aesthetic results in ABR (n.s.), while in bilateral reconstruction IBR tended to score higher (n.s.). Scar evaluation resulted in a better result of IBR in both categories (p &lt; 0.01). Breast sensitivity was severely impaired in both groups. The Breast-Q revealed a significantly higher “patient satisfaction with breast” after ABR (p = 0.033), while the other QoL-tests and subscales showed no significant differences between the two procedures.

Conclusion

ABR is associated with a higher patient satisfaction despite the high probability of secondary procedures to improve the aesthetic outcome, whereas IBR-patients suffer more often from major complications. Furthermore, the laterality of reconstruction should be included in the individual decision-making process.

Donor-Site Morbidity and Quality of Life after Autologous Breast Reconstruction with PAP versus TMG Flap

The transverse myocutaneous gracilis (TMG) and the profunda artery perforator (PAP) flap are both safe choices for autologous breast reconstruction originating from the same donor region in the upper thigh. We aimed to compare the post-operative outcome regarding donor-site morbidity and quality of life. We included 18 patients who had undergone autologous breast reconstruction with a PAP flap (n = 27 flaps). Prospective evaluation of donor-site morbidity was performed by applying the same questionnaire that had already been established in a previous study evaluating TMG flap (n = 25 flaps) outcome, and results were compared. Comparison of the two patient groups showed equivalent results concerning patient-reported visibility of the donor-site scar and thigh symmetry. Still, the TMG group was significantly more satisfied with the scar (p = 0.015) and its position (p = 0.001). No difference was found regarding the ability to sit for prolonged periods. Donor-site wound complications were seen more frequently in the PAP group (29.6%) than in the TMG group (4.0%). Both groups expressed rather high satisfaction with their quality of life. Both flaps show minimal functional donor-site morbidity and high patient satisfaction. To minimize wound healing problems in PAP patients, thorough planning of the skin paddle is necessary.

Donor Site Satisfaction Following Autologous Fat Transfer for Total Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

With evolving breast cancer survival and patient preferences, it is essential that reconstructive surgeons worldwide continue searching for the best reconstruction technique for patients. Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is a relatively new technique for total breast reconstruction that has already proven to be effective and safe with all advantages of autologous tissue. However, little is known about the aesthetic results and satisfaction concerning donor sites.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to measure donor site satisfaction following AFT for total breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients.

METHODS

Between May and August of 2021, participants of the BREAST- trial who were at least 24 months after their final reconstruction surgery were invited to complete an additional survey concerning donor sites. The BODY-Q was utilized for data collection. Results of AFT patients were compared with a control group of implant-based reconstruction patients who did not have a donor site.

RESULTS

A total of 51 patients (20 control, 31 intervention) completed the questionnaire. Satisfaction with body did not statistically differ between the groups. The most frequent complaint was contour irregularities (31 reports, 60.8%), with the least favorable donor site being thighs (23 reports, 53.5%) in the AFT group.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction with body did not differ between breast cancer patients receiving AFT or implant-based reconstruction, meaning that large-volume liposuction does not aesthetically affect the utilized donor sites. Nevertheless, reconstructive surgeons should be aware of possible donor site complications, especially contour irregularities at the thighs, and discuss this with their patients.

Breast Implant Illness: Surgical, Autoimmune, and Breast Reconstruction Associations

Breast implant illness refers to a combination of different symptoms related to breast implant surgery, including fatigue, brain fog, and arthralgias. This malaise occurs after cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgeries, although it has not been proven to be a disease. Even recent studies have reported concluding statements of the etiology, diagnosis, and treatment as unclear and widely unknown. Therefore, this review aimed to determine the associations between the manifestations of breast implant illness in surgery and breast reconstruction, as well as the autoimmune responses involved. Complications associated with breast implants include breast pain, capsular contracture, infections, as well as other manifestations specific to breast reconstruction. Moreover, patients with implants may present with new-onset systemic sclerosis, Sjögren’s syndrome, and connective tissue diseases. However, the incidence of capsular contracture has steadily decreased with each generation of implants, particularly since the development of textured implants, as well as with the use of antibiotics and antiseptic pocket irrigation. However, the incidence of anaplastic large cell lymphoma has increased with the use of textured implants. Remarkably, the autoimmune response to these implants remains unclear. Therefore, close follow-up, careful observation of any symptom presentation, and evidence-based treatment decisions are necessary for patients with breast implants.