The Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Compared to Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Healing after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy:

Transaxillary Single-Port Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction in Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy or Not: A Comparative Study with Analysis of Surgical Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes

BACKGROUND

In most cases, transaxillary single-port endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (E-NSM-IIBR) is conducted in patients with early-stage breast cancer, ensuring surgical safety while achieving improved breast aesthetics. However, whether E-NSM-IIBR is appropriate in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is still unclear. The aim of this study was to report the surgical safety and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of breast cancer patients who underwent E-NSM-IIBR with NAC in comparison to those who did not receive NAC.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on patients who underwent E-NSM-IIBR with or without NAC at a single center between January 2021 and July 2022. Patient demographics, postoperative complications, and PROs evaluated using the BREAST-Q version 2.0 questionnaire were compared between the two groups. Factors associated with PROs at 9 months after surgery were assessed with linear regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 92 patients who underwent E-NSM-IIBR were included in the study, with 27 patients receiving NAC and 65 patients not receiving NAC. There was no significant difference in the incidence of postoperative complications between the two groups. The BREAST-Q version 2.0 questionnaire was completed by 24 out of 27 patients (88.9%) in the NAC group and 59 out of 65 patients (90.8%) in the non-NAC group at 9 months after surgery. The patient-reported outcomes in various domains of the BREAST-Q did not show a significant difference between the two cohorts. The results of the multiple linear regression analysis indicated that in the both groups age (β = - 0.985, 95% CI - 1.598 to - 0.371, p = 0.003 in the NAC group; β = - 0.510, - 1.011 to - 0.009, p = 0.046 in the non-NAC group) and rippling (β = - 21.862, - 36.768 to - 6.955, p = 0.006 in the NAC group; β = - 7.787, - 15.151 to - 0.423, p = 0.039 in the non-NAC group) significantly impacted the patients' satisfaction with breasts, and PMRT was negatively associated with patients' physical well-being of chest (β = - 13.813, - 26.962 to - 0.664, p = 0.040 in the NAC group; β = - 18.574, - 30.661 to - 6.487, p = 0.003 in the non-NAC group). Our findings revealed that patients with larger implant volumes had higher scores in psychosocial well-being (β = 0.082, 0.001 to 0.162, p = 0.047), whereas implant displacement (β = - 14.937, - 28.175 to - 1.700, p=0.028) had a negative impact on patients' psychological well-being in the non-NAC group. However, our results did not demonstrate any significant influencing factors on patients' psychosocial well-being within the NAC group.

CONCLUSION

Our preliminary experiences confirm that E-NSM-IIBR is a safe option for selected patients even after NAC, with favorable patient-reported outcomes comparable with those in the primary surgery setting. The postoperative long-term outcomes of patients who undergo radiation therapy after NAC merit further investigation in the future.

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 .

Safety and Quality of Life in Women with Immediate Reconstruction with Polyurethane Implants after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Outcomes from The Preq-20 Trial

INTRODUCTION

Various studies have evaluated the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on the complications of breast cancer surgery, most of which were retrospective and did not assess the variables related to postoperative risk factors. The aim of this study is to analyse the safety and satisfaction of women included in the PreQ-20 trial who underwent NAC and who underwent mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with prepectoral polyurethane implants.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The patients included in the study belong to the prospective study PreQ-20. The study group consisted of patients who underwent immediate reconstruction after primary systemic therapy. The control groups consisted of patients with immediate reconstruction and adjuvant chemotherapy (control group 1) and patients with an infiltrating carcinoma or in situ ductal carcinoma who did not require chemotherapy (control group 2).

RESULTS

The study included 157 women, 58 (36.9%) of whom underwent primary systemic therapy. The indication for genetic study was significantly greater for the study group (87.9%) than for control groups 1 (49.1%) or 2 (30.4%). Seventy-two (45.9%) of the patients underwent bilateral mastectomy (BM), a procedure that was performed significantly more frequently in the study group (69%) than in control groups 1 (30.2%) or 2 (34.8%). The incidence rate for BM after complete pathologic response was 78%. There were no statistically significant differences in the number of complications between the groups. Implant loss was significantly more frequent in control group 1 (13.2%) than in the study group (3.4%) and control group 2 (2.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Mastectomy with prepectoral polyurethane implant reconstruction in patients with neoadjuvant chemotherapy presented a similar incidence of complications compared with patients who underwent primary surgery. There is a high rate of BM in women with NAC.

Trends in outcomes with adoption of indocyanine green angiography in postmastectomy reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Indocyanine green angiography (ICGA) aims to reduce ischaemic complications by supplementing intraoperative perfusion assessment of mastectomy flaps. Learning curves for this technology have not been analysed. We evaluated changes in patient outcomes with increasing case volume after ICGA adoption in postmastectomy reconstruction.

METHODS

Single-institution retrospective analysis of 320 implant-based reconstructions following mastectomy using ICGA from 2015, when it was introduced, to 2021. Cases chronologically divided into tertiles and complications amongst groups evaluated. Trends in ischaemic complications plotted using weighted moving average. CUSUM analysis determined after how many cases plateau was reached. Number of ischaemic complications prior to plateau calculated with AUC analysis.

RESULTS

Ischaemic complications decreased over time (Group 1, 15.1%; Group 2, 11.2%; Group 3, 4.7%, P = 0.034). Cases of delayed reconstruction increased over time (Group 1, 6.6%; Group 2, 28%; Group 3, 22.4%; P < 0.001). Our institution reached plateau of 10% ischaemic complications after 160 cases. Mean incidence of ischaemic complications decreased from 16.9% during the first 160 cases to 3.8% after plateau was reached (P < 0.001). Eleven extra breasts (6.9%) experienced ischaemic complications, that may have been avoided if operated by surgeons after the first 160 cases.

CONCLUSIONS

There was increased tendency towards a conservative approach of delaying reconstruction and decreased rates of ischaemic complications with increasing case volume after ICGA implementation. A significant number of cases were needed to reach plateau of minimal ischaemic complications. This data could encourage development of standardized protocols for this technology to shorten learning curves for improved patient outcomes.

"The Batwing Mastopexy in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction: An Aesthetic Enhancement For Cancer Patients"

BACKGROUND

Historically, many patients with breast ptosis have been excluded from nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM). By performing mastopexy at the time of immediate reconstruction, more ptotic patients can be considered for NSM. We review our experience of simultaneous batwing mastopexy performed at the time of immediate implant-based reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review identified patients who underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction from 2015 to 2020 at a single institution. The patients were divided into two cohorts, batwing mastopexy and standard reconstruction (no mastopexy) and compared.

RESULTS

A total of 324 breast operations in 188 patients were included (80 concurrent batwing and 244 standard implant-based reconstructions). Patient demographics were similar for both groups, except patients in the batwing group had greater ptosis, while more patients in the standard group underwent adjuvant chemotherapy. Mean follow-up was 15.9 months (range 3.19 to 55.20 months). Complications rates were comparable in the batwing and standard groups with no statistically significant differences in rates of hematoma (1.3% vs 3.3%; p=0.34), seroma (5.0% vs 8.2%; p=0.34), major infection (8.8% vs 9.0%;p=0.94), skin/nipple necrosis (6.3% vs 11.5%; p=0.18) and explantation (11.3% vs 14.8%; p=0.43). Rate of minor infections was higher in the group with concurrent batwing mastopexy (10.0% vs 3.7%; p=0.03).

CONCLUSION

We demonstrate that simultaneous batwing mastopexy can be safely performed at the time of immediate breast reconstruction. In our experience, this technique provides comparable complication rates, improves aesthetic outcomes in patients with significant ptosis or macromastia and allows NSM to be an option for those who would otherwise be excluded.

Complications after breast reconstruction with alloplastic material in breast cancer patients submitted or not to post mastectomy radiotherapy

Background and purpose

Breast reconstruction following mastectomy is a relevant element of breast cancer treatment. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of radiotherapy (RT) on local complications in patients with breast cancer that had undergone breast reconstruction with alloplastic material.

Materials and methods

Retrospective study of breast cancer patients submitted to mastectomy and breast reconstruction from 2009 to 2013. Clinical and treatment variables were correlated with early and late complications.

Results

251 patients were included; mean age was 49.7 (25 to 78) years. Reconstruction was immediate in 94% of the patients, with 88% performed with a temporary tissue expander. Postoperative radiotherapy (RT) was delivered to 167 patients (66.5%). Early complications were present in 26.3% of the patients. Irradiated patients presented 5.4% incidence of late complications versus 2.4% for non-irradiated patients (p = 0.327). Diabetes (OR = 3.41 95% CI: 1.23-9.45, p = 0.018) and high body mass index (BMI) (OR = 2.65; 95% CI: 1.60-4.37, p < 0.0001) were the main risk factors. The overall incidence of late complications was 4.4%, with predominance of severe capsular contracture (8/11). Arterial hypertension (OR = 4.78; 95% CI: 1.97-11.63, p = 0.001), BMI (OR = 0.170; 95% CI: 0.048-0.607, p = 0.006) and implant placement (OR = 3.55; 95% CI: 1.26-9.99, p = 0.016) were related to late complications.

Conclusions

The overall rate of complications was low in this population. Radiotherapy delivery translated into a higher but not statistically significant risk of late complications when compared with the non-irradiated patients. Already well-known clinical risk factors for complications after breast reconstruction were identified.

Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on surgical complications in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The increased use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) facilitates an increase in breast-conserving surgery and immediate breast reconstruction. While NACT is considered to have the same oncological safety as adjuvant chemotherapy, evidence on the impact of NACT on surgical outcomes following breast surgery is unclear and varies across studies. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the impact of NACT on surgical complications in breast cancer patients undergoing any kind of breast surgery.

METHODS

Database searches were conducted (March 26, 2021) to identify studies assessing the impact of NACT on postoperative complications. Studies were included if they compared a group of patients treated with NACT to a control group that was not, and if they reported at least one of our defined outcomes. Primary effect measures were odds ratios (ORs) and mean difference with a 95% confidence interval. Study quality was assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies comprising 134,191 patients were included. NACT was not associated with an increased complication rate for overall complications (OR: 1.13, 95% CI: 0.86 to 1.47, p = 0.38), individual postoperative complications, nor surgery duration. There was a non-significant trend towards NACT increasing the risk of seroma, wound complications, skin or nipple necrosis, flap ischemia or loss, and implant loss. A significant difference in blood loss was found, favouring NACT (MD = -75.85, 95% CI: -107.47 to -44.23, p < 0.00001). Heterogeneity was significant between the studies (I²>50%).

CONCLUSION

Compared to a control group, NACT was not found to affect the surgical complications adversely.

Is Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Indicated after Previous Breast Surgery? A Series of 387 Institutional Cases

BACKGROUND

Previous breast surgery does not represent an absolute contraindication for nipple-sparing mastectomy, although it may negatively interfere with surgical outcomes. The aim of the authors' study was to confirm the feasibility of nipple-sparing mastectomy after previous breast surgery, focusing on skin incisions and risk factors, complications, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively identified 368 patients who underwent 387 nipple-sparing mastectomies and reconstruction after previous surgery (quadrantectomy, breast resection, augmentation and reduction mammaplasty, mastopexy) at the European Institute of Oncology from January of 2003 to November of 2017. Patterns of skin incisions (i.e., radial, hemiperiareolar, periareolar, vertical pattern, inframammary fold, Wise-pattern, and round-block) for primary surgery and for mastectomy, type of reconstruction, and radiotherapy have been recorded. The authors collected data regarding early and late complications and further operations (implant change, fat grafting) performed within 2 years to improve cosmetic outcomes. Oncologic follow-up has been reported for in-breast recurrences.

RESULTS

Complete and partial nipple-areola complex necrosis occurred, respectively, in 2.8 percent and in 5.4 percent of cases. The authors recorded 5.4 percent failures resulting in implant removal. The analysis of risk factors for complications or for the need for further operations showed no significant association with skin incision for first surgery and mastectomy, use of the same skin incision, previous radiotherapy, or type of primary surgery. Five-year overall survival and disease-free survival were 99.1 and 93.8 percent, respectively. No nipple recurrence was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' results confirm that nipple-sparing mastectomy can be a safe surgical procedure after previous breast surgery. Surgical planning should be tailored to each patient.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Reconstructive outcome analysis of the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) was initially applied to locally advanced breast cancer to convert advanced lesions to an operable status. Currently, its application has been expanded to enhance overall oncological results, especially in patients with triple-negative or HER-2-positive breast cancer. With more NACT being applied, the role and impact of this approach on breast reconstruction needs to be determined. This study aimed to perform a complete reconstructive outcome analysis of patients receiving NACT who underwent immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective review of a single reconstructive surgeon's immediate breast reconstructions performed from July 2008 to December 2018 was undertaken. The results were stratified by the use of NACT. Patient demographics, delivery of NACT, adjuvant treatment, incidence of surgical complications, and postoperative photographs were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 269 patients were included. The mean follow-up was 46.3 months. Forty-six out of 269 patients received NACT and were included in the NACT group. The other patients were included in the non-NACT group. When implant-based reconstruction was planned, the NACT group had a higher rate of two-stage tissue expander-implant reconstruction than direct-to-implant reconstruction (p < 0.001). The requirement for postmastectomy radiotherapy was higher in the NACT group (p < 0.001). The surgical complication rates were similar between groups after adjusting for confounding factors. The objective aesthetic outcomes assessed by 6 plastic surgeons were also similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate breast reconstruction is a safe and reliable procedure, with an acceptable reconstructive complication rate and satisfactory aesthetic outcomes, for patients treated with NACT.

Surgical Complications of Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Women Concurrently Treated With Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND AND AIM

To date, studies on adjuvant chemotherapy as a risk factor for the surgical outcome of combined mastectomy and breast reconstruction were hampered by the inclusion of mixed reconstructive cohorts of both delayed and immediate timing and of both autologous and implant-based techniques. Consequently, there is a paucity of data on the impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on surgical complication rates after combined skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODOLOGY

We compared the postoperative complications that occurred within 16 weeks after this combined procedure in 131 women (139 breasts) treated with adjuvant chemotherapy with those in a control group of 491 women (517 breasts) not receiving any adjuvant therapy within 16 weeks.

RESULTS

In line with the clinically indicated selection of women to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy, the interventional group differed significantly from the control group in 7 of the 12 patient- and procedure-related characteristics. The prevalence of minor complications (13.7% and 12.4%, respectively, P = 0.68) and major complications (31.7% and 29.4%, respectively, P = 0.60) did not differ significantly between the interventional group and the controls. The fraction of breasts that needed unscheduled surgery (0.29 and 0.24, respectively, P = 0.20), the fraction of total number of interventions (0.34 and 0.33, respectively, P = 0.24), and the fraction of implants lost (0.72 and 0.67, respectively, P = 0.86) did not differ significantly between both groups. The onset of chemotherapy, furthermore, seemed not to influence the occurrence or severity of complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Like other women who have to undergo mastectomy, women who need to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy can potentially benefit from combined skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction.

Optimizing Aesthetic Outcomes in Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been associated with improved quality of life and patient satisfaction with similar oncologic outcomes compared with traditional mastectomy techniques. By conserving the nipple-areola complex and the majority of the breast skin envelope, NSM allows for improved aesthetic outcomes after breast reconstruction. However, the technique is also associated with a steep learning curve that must be considered to achieve optimal outcomes. It is important that the plastic surgeon functions in concert with the extirpative breast surgeon to optimize outcomes because the reconstruction is ultimately dependent on the quality of the overlying mastectomy flaps. Various other factors influence the complex interplay between aesthetic and reconstructive outcomes in NSM, including preoperative evaluation, specific implant- and autologous-based considerations, as well as techniques to optimize and correct nipple-areola complex position. Management strategies for complications necessary to salvage a successful reconstruction are also reviewed. Lastly, techniques to expand indications for NSM and maximize nipple viability as well as preshape the breast are discussed. Through thoughtful preoperative planning and intraoperative technique, ideal aesthetic results in NSM may be achieved.

How to Optimize Aesthetics for the Partial Mastectomy Patient

Aesthetic concern is one of the main driving forces behind the popularity of the oncoplastic approach to breast conservation therapy. Oncoplastic options at the time of lumpectomy include volume replacement techniques such as flaps and volume displacement techniques such as the oncoplastic reduction. These techniques can be employed to ensure preservation of breast shape and contour, size and symmetry, inframammary fold position, and position of the nipple-areola complex. The importance of aesthetic outcomes is not only to improve overall patient satisfaction but also to minimize the need for revisional surgeries for shape and symmetry. The purpose of this review is to discuss ways to optimize the aesthetic result and to review the evidence behind aesthetic outcomes.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction - early complications and outcomes of the treatment

Aim of the study

To assess the early complications and outcomes of the treatment of patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with immediate breast reconstruction.

Material and methods

A retrospective study was performed on 120 patients who underwent 130 NSM (10 bilateral) procedures between 1.01.2015 and 31.12.2017 in two oncology centers in Poland. In 80 patients a breast cancer was recognized. Sixteen patients underwent operations on the basis of being carriers of the BRCA1 mutation. The follow-up period ranged from 10 to 34 months. The NSM procedures were performed with or without skin reduction and a free nipple-areola complex (NAC) transplant, with 130 prosthetic devices inserted subpectorally. Breast cancer patients followed the standard protocol for adjuvant therapy.

Results

The patients for risk-reducing mastectomies were younger. Prevalent histology was no special type (NST) in 60 out of 80 patients, mean tumor - NAC distance was 43.3 mm. The prevalent biological subtype was Luminal B HER2-negative. Adjuvant management consisted of chemotherapy in 61 and radiotherapy in 35 patients. We noted 14 cases of complications, 13 in the cancer group, and 1 in the non-cancer group. Skin necrosis was the most common. The mean time for the appearance of the complications was 2.8 months. No local recurrences were observed.

Conclusions

NSM is a safe and effective surgical option for qualified patients with breast cancer and in risk-reducing mastectomies.

Do Nipple Necrosis Rates Differ in Prepectoral Versus Submuscular Implant-Based Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy?

BACKGROUND

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become increasingly popular, given its oncologic safety and preserved nipple areolar complex (NAC) aesthetics. Reconstruction has recently shifted from traditional submuscular (SM) to prepectoral (PP) implant placement. It remains unclear how the plane of implant placement might affect NAC perfusion. Our goal was to assess postoperative outcomes following NSM with SM versus PP implant placement.

METHODS

A retrospective single-institution review was performed of all patients undergoing NSM and immediate breast reconstruction in either the PP or SM plane from January 2015 to June 2019. Clinicopathologic details and 90-day complication rates were collected. SM and PP group complications were compared using Chi square analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 288 breasts (160 patients) were included, including SM in 79 cases (44 patients) and PP in 209 cases (116 patients). Clinicopathologic features between groups were similar. Overall, the rate of NAC necrosis was 15.1%, with no differences between the SM and PP cohorts (p = 0.79). In cases of NAC necrosis, there was no difference between the SM and PP groups in return to the operating room for debridement (p = 1.0) or explant (p = 0.33).

CONCLUSIONS

In our cohort, immediate implant-based reconstruction in the SM and PP planes following NSM was equally safe with respect to postoperative complications and NAC ischemia.

Optimal breast reconstruction type for patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy followed by radiation therapy

PURPOSE

To explore the optimal type of breast reconstruction and the time interval to postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) associated with lower complications in breast cancer patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

METHODS

We reviewed the medical records of 300 patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, mastectomy with breast reconstruction and PMRT at our institution from 2000 to 2017. Reconstruction types included autologous flaps (AR), single-stage-direct-to-implant and two-stages expander/implant (TE/I). The primary endpoint was the rate of reconstruction complications including infection, skin and fat necrosis. Subgroup analysis compared rates of capsular contracture, implant rupture, implant exposure and overall implant failure in single-stage-direct-to-implant to TE/I. The secondary endpoint was identifying the time interval between surgery with immediate implant-based reconstruction and PMRT associated with lower probability of implant failure. Logistic regression models, Kaplan-Meier estimates and Polynomial regression were used to assess endpoints.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 43.5 months. 29.3%, 28.3% and 42.4% of the cohort had AR, TE/I and single-stage-direct-to-implant D, respectively. The 5-year cumulative incidence rate of complications was 14.0%, 29.7% and 19.4% for AR, TE/I and single-stage-direct-to-implant, respectively (Log rank p = 0.02). Multivariate analysis showed significant association between TE/I and higher risk of infection (OR 8.1, p = 0.009) compared to AR, while single-stage-direct-to-implant and AR were comparable (OR 3.2, p = 0.2). On subgroup analysis, TE/I was significantly associated with higher rates of implant failure. The mean wait time to deliver PMRT after immediate reconstruction with no adjuvant chemotherapy was 8.4 and 10.7 weeks in single-stage-direct-to-implant and TE/I, respectively (p < 0.005). Delivering PMRT after 8 weeks of surgery yielded 10% probability of reconstruction failure in single-stage-direct-to-implant versus 40% in TE/I.

CONCLUSION

In comparison to two stages reconstruction, single-stage-direct-to-implant following neoadjuvant chemotherapy has lower complications and offers timely delivery of PMRT.

Modern surgical treatment of breast cancer

Breast cancer is the most frequent cancer in women all over the world. The prognosis is generally good, with a five-year overall survival rate above 90% for all stages. It is still the second leading cause of cancer-related death among women. Surgical treatment of breast cancer has changed dramatically over the years. Initially, treatment involved major surgery with long hospitalization, but it is now mostly accomplished as an outpatient procedure with a quick recovery. Thanks to well-designed retrospective and randomly controlled prospective studies, guidelines are continually changing. We are presently in an era where safely de-escalating surgery is increasingly emphasized. Breast cancer is a heterogenous disease, where a "one-size-fits-all" treatment approach is not appropriate. There is often more than one surgical solution carrying equal oncological safety for an individual patient. In these situations, it is important to include the patient in the treatment decision-making process through well informed consent. For this to be optimal, the physician must be fully updated on the surgical options. A consequence of an improved prognosis is more breast cancer survivors, and therefore physical appearance and quality of life is more in focus. Modern breast cancer treatment is increasingly personalized from a surgical point of view but is dependent on a multidisciplinary approach. Detailed algorithms for surgery of the breast and the axilla are required for optimal treatment and quality control. This review illustrates how breast cancer treatment has changed over the years and how the current standard is based on high quality scientific research.

Can I Keep My Nipple? Factors Influencing the Surgical Decision between Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

Both skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) are well accepted in the management of breast cancer. Factors that influence the decision of choosing one of these techniques over the other, however, remain to be well elucidated. From January 2010 to December 2017, 734 patients at our institution underwent one of these two procedures. Factors differentiating these patient cohorts were compared. In this study, 196 (26.7%) underwent NSM and 538 (73.3%) underwent SSM. The median age of patients at the time of surgery was 50 years (range, 22–78 years). On multivariate analysis, younger patient age, insurance type, BRCA1 mutation status, smaller breast size (by weight), and those who did not undergo neoadjuvant chemotherapy were more likely to undergo NSM. Surgeon also was an independent predictor of whether patients had NSM or SSM. There may be many factors that play into the decision to pursue NSM versus SSM, but younger patient age, BRCA mutation status, breast size, and whether the patient had neoadjuvant chemotherapy may be key among them. Insurance status may also be a factor for some patients. Aside from these factors, some surgeons may be more or less inclined to perform NSM.

Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: A safe option?

INTRODUCTION

Immediate reconstruction (IBR) after mastectomy in patients who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) remains controversial. The aim of this study is to analyze and compare oncological results as well as complication and reoperation rates in patients undergoing NACT and a control group.

METHODS

Retrospective observational case-control study of patients with breast cancer who underwent bilateral mastectomy and direct-to-implant IBR (BMIBR) from 2000-2016. The group that received NACT was matched 1:5 to patients without NACT (Control group). We evaluated differences between groups using the χ² or Fisher test (qualitative variables), Mann-Whitney U or Student's t-test (quantitative variables). The survival analysis was performed using Kaplan-Meier curves and log-rank test (SPSS 22.0).

RESULTS

The study included a total of 171 patients with BMIBR: 62 patients (36.3%) after NACT and 109 patients (63.7%) in the control group without NACT. Median follow-up was 52.0 (IQR: 23.0-94.0) months. In both groups, the indication for BMIBR was patient choice (32.7%). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in terms of complication rate (24.2% in the NACT group and 19.3% in the control group [P=.44]), but differences in oncological results were found. Patients in the NACT Group had three times more risk of recurrence at a given time than patients in the control group (3.009 [1.349-6.713]) according to the univariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct-to-implant IBR after skin-sparing mastectomy is a viable option for breast cancer patients undergoing NACT.

The Importance of Tissue Perfusion in Reconstructive Breast Surgery

Immediate breast reconstruction relies on healthy mastectomy flaps for success. Tissue perfusion of these mastectomy flaps is dependent on multiple patient-, operative-, and surgeon-specific factors, which must be optimized. Unfortunately, tissue perfusion is also notoriously difficult to accurately assess and investigate. In this review, we discuss the importance of tissue perfusion in successful reconstructive breast surgery with an emphasis on perfusion assessment and techniques to ensure that anatomic mastectomy flap perfusion is maintained for immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy. Preoperative and patient-specific factors should be considered with operative plans modified to minimize ischemic risk. Intraoperatively, incision planning and mastectomy dissection will dictate skin flap perfusion. Most importantly, mastectomy dissection in a plane at the breast capsule will maximize preservation of the subdermal plexus and subcutaneous perforators that supply the breast skin envelope while also maximizing oncologic parenchymal resection. Such anatomic dissection has been demonstrated to decrease risk of ischemic complications in immediate breast reconstruction. Postoperatively, any potential or actual areas of impaired perfusion and ischemia must be diagnosed appropriately and managed proactively to ensure a successful reconstruction. It is also important for surgeons to be aware of imaging modalities and adjunctive technologies that can help promote and assess optimal mastectomy flap tissue perfusion. Plastic surgeons and breast surgeons must actively and collaboratively work together to ensure their mutual goals are met, and optimal outcomes are attained for patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction With a Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap: A Study of Patient Satisfaction

INTRODUCTION

The morphological result of nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction may be disappointing for patients who undergo skin-sparing mastectomies and immediate breast reconstruction, followed by secondary reconstruction of the nipple-areola complex.The aim of this study was to analyze patient satisfaction after nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator flap.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Our retrospective study involved all patients who underwent an immediate breast reconstruction after unilateral mastectomy with conservation of the NAC. The following three kinds of surgical approach were used: mastectomy with periareolar incision, mastectomy with hemiperiareolar incision and lateral extension, and mastectomy with inverted-T mammoplasty incision. Our study was based on a survey using a standardized questionnaire and a Likert scale to report patient satisfaction on the basis of criteria defined by the investigators.

RESULTS

We evaluated 17 patients. All reconstruction patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the overall aesthetic appearance, projection, and volume as well as the appearance of scarring on the reconstructed breast. None of our patients reported dissatisfaction in response to the criteria under evaluation. A periareolar incision was used most often to perform the mastectomy (10 patients). Partial NAC necrosis was observed in five patients, without negatively influencing their perception of the morphological outcome of their reconstruction.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate breast reconstruction using a deep inferior epigastric perforator free flap after nipple-sparing mastectomies met with a high rate of general satisfaction among patients and resulted in a low rate of nipple-areola complex necrosis.

Overview of indications for nipple sparing mastectomy

The introduction of more targeted systemic therapies, better screening modalities with earlier diagnosis and dramatically improved reconstructive techniques has allowed more minimally invasive approaches to breast surgery. The recent introduction of nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) has dramatically improved the cosmetic outcomes and quality of life (QoL) for patients undergoing mastectomy. This technique involves preservation of both the skin envelope including the nipple areolar complex commonly through a barely visible inframammary skin incision followed by immediate breast reconstruction. An ideal candidate includes women with small breasts, absence of ptosis, low BMI and not actively smoking. High risk patients include those with radiation treatment, active smokers, macromastia, high BMI >30 kg/m², grade 2 or 3 ptosis and active smokers. There are several new techniques to approach complex high risk patients which have expanded the candidates for NSM.

Mastectomy Flap Thickness and Complications in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Objective Evaluation using Magnetic Resonance Imaging

Background:

Ischemic complications after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have been associated with numerous variables. However, the impact of NSM flap thickness has been incompletely evaluated.

Methods:

NSM flap thickness was determined for all NSMs from 2006 to 2016 with available pre- or postoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs). Demographics and outcomes were stratified by those with and without ischemic complications.

Results:

Of 1,037 NSM reconstructions, 420 NSMs had MRI data available, which included 379 preoperative MRIs and 60 postoperative MRIs. Average total preoperative skin/subcutaneous tissue NSM flap thickness was 11.4 mm. Average total postoperative NSM flap thickness was 8.7 mm. NSMs with ischemic complications were found to have significantly thinner overall postoperative NSM flap thickness compared with those without ischemic complications (P = 0.0280). Average overall postoperative NSM flap thickness less than 8.0 mm was found to be an independent predictor of ischemic complications (odds ratio, 6.5263; P = 0.026). In NSMs with both pre- and postoperative MRIs, the overall average postoperative NSM flap thickness was 68.2% of preoperative measurements. Average overall postoperative NSM flap thickness was significantly less than average overall preoperative NSM flap thickness (P < 0.0001). NSMs with ischemic complications were found to have a significantly lower ratio of overall postoperative to preoperative flap thickness (52.0% versus 74.0%; P < 0.0001).

Conclusions:

Ischemic complications after NSM are significantly associated with thinner postoperative NSM flap thickness. Particularly, NSM flap thickness less than 8.0 mm is a positive independent predictor of ischemic complications. The ratio of postoperative to preoperative NSM flap thickness was significantly lower in reconstructions with ischemic complications.

Comparative Study of Prepectoral and Subpectoral Expander-Based Breast Reconstruction and Clavien IIIb Score Outcomes

Prepectoral breast reconstruction is increasingly popular. This study compares complications between 2 subpectoral and 1 prepectoral breast reconstruction technique.

Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: Review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications

Skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies are relatively new conservative surgical approaches to breast cancer. In SSM most of the breast skin is conserved to create a pocket that facilitates immediate breast reconstruction with implant or autologous graft to achieve a quality cosmetic outcome. NSM is closely similar except that the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is also conserved. Meta-analyses indicate that outcomes for SSM and NSM do not differ from those for non-conservative mastectomies. Recurrence rates in the NAC after NSM are acceptably low (0-3.7%). Other studies indicate that NSM is associated with high patient satisfaction and good psychological adjustment. Indications are carcinoma or DCIS that require mastectomy (including after neoadjuvant chemotherapy). NSM is also suitable for women undergoing risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy. Tumor not less than 2 cm from the NAC is recommended, but may be less important than no evidence of nipple involvement on mandatory intraoperative nipple margin assessment. A positive margin is an absolute contraindication for nipple preservation. Other contraindications are microcalcifications close to the subareolar region and a positive nipple discharge. Complication rates are similar to those for other types of post-mastectomy reconstructions. The main complication of NSM is NAC necrosis, however as surgeon experience matures, frequency declines. Factors associated with complications are voluminous breast, ptosis, smoking, obesity, and radiotherapy. Since the access incision is small, breast tissue may be left behind, so only experienced breast surgeons should do these operations in close collaboration with the plastic surgeon. For breast cancer patients requiring mastectomy, NSM should be the option of choice.