Patient satisfaction in one-stage immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy: A multi-center comparative patient evaluation of prosthesis, LDMF, and TRAM techniques

Is a soft tissue reinforcing mesh necessary in immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction for early breast cancer in patients with low-volume breast? A single-center, retrospective Chinese clinical study

It is controversial as to whether soft tissue reinforcement mesh should be used for immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy for low-volume breast early breast cancer (LVBEBC) in Chinese adult women. We collected data on 89 patients with LVBEBC who underwent such a surgery and divided them into two groups: 39 patients in the totally subpectoral prosthesis-only breast reconstruction group (simple group) and 50 patients in the prosthesis-combined titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TCPM) group (or the so-called "dual plane" or "mesh-assisted partially subpectoral breast reconstruction group") (combined group). The results demonstrated no difference in operative time, intraoperative bleeding, and postoperative complications between the two groups; however, total drainage volume and extubation time were less and shorter, respectively, in the combined group. The median follow-up time was 18.6 months without local recurrence or distant metastasis in both groups. At 24 months after surgery, the excellent and good rates of breast reconstruction were higher in the combined group. However, patients' BMI, breast morphology, and breast volume of 300 mL or more had an effect on the shape of the reconstructed breast; in addition, in patients with higher BMI, conical breast morphology, and breast volume over 300 mL, the shape of the breast was more perfect with the prosthesis combined with TCPM reconstruction.Trial registration: This retrospective study was "retrospectively registered" in the Sixth Affiliated Hospital of South China University of Technology of China on March 15, 2022 (No. 2022018) and in the National Medical Research Registry filing system of China ( https://www.medicalresearch.org.cn ) (No. MR-44-22-003618).

Role of Qualitative and Quantitative Indocyanine Green Angiography to Assess Mastectomy Skin Flaps Perfusion in Nipple/Skin-Sparing and Skin-Reducing Mastectomies with Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

Methods

Consecutive women scheduled for nipple/skin-sparing/skin-reducing mastectomy between May 2020 and April 2021 were prospectively enrolled. Patients were divided into Group 1 in the absence of superficial and full-thickness necrosis (SN; FTN) and Group 2 in the presence of both. T1 (time between ICG injection and the initial perfusion of the least perfused MSF area), ICG-Q1, and ICG-Q% (absolute and relative perfusion values of the least vascularized area) were collected.

Results

38 breasts were considered. FTN was reported in 4 breasts (10.5%) and SN in 3 (7.9%). The two groups statistically differ in T1 (Group2 > Group1) and ICG-Q% (Group1 > Group2) (p < 0.05). T1 could statistically predict ICG-Q1 and ICG-Q%. Both quantitative values have a sensitivity of 57% and a NPV of 89%; ICG-Q% shows higher specificity (81% vs 77%) and PPV (40% vs 36%).

Conclusions

Quantitative ICG angiography may additionally reduce MSF necrosis. Moreover, longer T1 may indicate possible postoperative necrosis. Considering these factors, intraoperative changes of reconstructive strategy could be adopted to reduce reconstructive failure.

Implant-based versus Autologous Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

For women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy, the comparative benefits and harms of implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and autologous reconstruction (AR) are not well known. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of IBR versus AR after mastectomy for breast cancer.

Methods

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies from inception to March 23, 2021. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies and strength of evidence (SoE) of our findings using standard methods.

Results

We screened 15,936 citations and included 40 studies (two randomized controlled trials and 38 adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies). Compared with patients who undergo IBR, those who undergo AR experience clinically significant better sexual well-being [summary adjusted mean difference (adjMD) 5.8, 95% CI 3.4-8.2; three studies] and satisfaction with breasts (summary adjMD 8.1, 95% CI 6.1-10.1; three studies) (moderate SoE for both outcomes). AR was associated with a greater risk of venous thromboembolism (moderate SoE), but IBR was associated with a greater risk of reconstructive failure (moderate SoE) and seroma (low SoE) in long-term follow-up (1.5-4 years). Other outcomes were comparable between groups, or the evidence was insufficient to merit conclusions.

Conclusions

Most evidence regarding IBR versus AR is of low or moderate SoE. AR is probably associated with better sexual well-being and satisfaction with breasts and lower risks of seroma and long-term reconstructive failure but a higher risk of thromboembolic events. New high-quality research is needed to address the important research gaps.

Long-Term Quality of Life (BREAST-Q) in Patients with Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction

(1) Background: Mastectomy is the surgical treatment of choice in 20-30% of women with breast cancer. In addition, more women are undergoing risk-reducing mastectomies. It is necessary to study these women's quality of life and satisfaction after surgery, as studies report high percentages of dissatisfaction with the results. The publication of the BREAST-Q© questionnaire in 2009 provided a valuable tool to measure these results. (2) Methods: Descriptive, cross-sectional study of 70 patients who underwent mastectomy and breast reconstruction, both therapeutic and prophylactic, in the last 10 years to whom the BREAST-Q© 2.0-Reconstruction Module questionnaire was provided for completion. (3) Results: The sexual satisfaction scale was the lowest score of the entire questionnaire (51.84 ± 21.13), while the highest score was obtained on the satisfaction with the surgeon scale (91.86 ± 18.11). The satisfaction with care scales showed the importance of the evaluation of these items for future studies. More than half of the patients of the study (51.5%) underwent at least one reoperation after the first surgery, with an average of one (1.15) intervention per patient and a maximum of five. (4) Conclusions: Mastectomy and breast reconstruction have a high negative impact on the sexual well-being of patients. The high percentage of reoperations is a factor to consider because of its possible influence on these patients' quality of life and satisfaction.