Outcome of Quality of Life for Women Undergoing Autologous versus Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction following Mastectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Predicting Postoperative Satisfaction with Breasts: How Important is the Preoperative BREAST-Q Score?

BACKGROUND

The role that preoperative Satisfaction with Breast plays in a patient's postoperative course after postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) is not understood. The aim of this study is to understand the impact of the preoperative score on postoperative outcome as an independent variable.

METHODS

We examined patients who underwent PMBR between 2017 and 2021 and who completed the BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breasts at 1 year postoperatively. Two multiple linear regression models (Model 1 with the preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts score and Model 2 without the preoperative score), likelihood ratio tests, simple t-statistics, and sample patient dataset to predict the 1 year score were performed. Multiple imputation was used to account for missing preoperative scores.

RESULTS

Overall, 2324 patients were included. Model 1 showed that the preoperative score is significantly associated with the postoperative score (β = 0.09, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.14; p < 0.001). Comparing Model 1 and Model 2 demonstrated that including preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts in a regression significantly improves model fit (test statistic = 10.04; p = 0.0021). Using the absolute value of the t-statistics as a measure of variable importance in linear regression, the importance of the preoperative score was quantified as 3.39-more important than neoadjuvant radiation, mastectomy weight, body mass index, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy, and race, but less than adjuvant radiation, reconstruction type, and psychiatric diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative Satisfaction with Breasts scores are an important independent predictor of postoperative satisfaction after PMBR. Just as vital sign and work-up are carefully documented before surgery, preoperative scores should be collected to pre-emptively gauge patients' satisfaction and optimize postoperative outcomes.

Timing and type of breast reconstruction in SweBRO 3: long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction after mastectomy helps women with breast cancer feel better about their bodies and lives. There is debate about the best time and type of reconstruction (immediate versus delayed, and using own tissue versus implants). Long-term studies are rare.

AIM

This study looked at long-term results of different breast reconstruction methods and timings in Swedish women who had mastectomies in 2000, 2005 or 2010. It focused on how satisfied the women were with their surgeries and their quality of life.

METHOD

The study included 5853 women from the Swedish National Breast Cancer Registry who had mastectomies in 2000, 2005 or 2010. Of these, 2904 women answered the survey, and 895 had breast reconstruction. Satisfaction and quality of life were measured using two surveys: EORTC QLQ-BRECON23 and BREAST-Q.

RESULTS

Of the women who answered the survey, 895 (31%) had breast reconstruction. Of these, 176 (20%) had immediate reconstruction, and 719 (80%) had delayed reconstruction; 58% had implant-based reconstructions, 31% had reconstructions using their own tissue, 2% had both types and 9% did not report the type of reconstruction. There were no major differences in satisfaction between immediate and delayed reconstruction. Women who used their own tissue were more satisfied with their results and breast appearance than those with implants.

CONCLUSION

Autologous reconstruction leads to better satisfaction and outcomes than implants. The timing of reconstruction (immediate versus delayed) was less of an influence on quality of life.

HoloDIEP-Faster and More Accurate Intraoperative DIEA Perforator Mapping Using a Novel Mixed Reality Tool

BACKGROUND

 Microsurgical breast reconstruction using abdominal tissue is a complex procedure, in part, due to variable vascular/perforator anatomy. Preoperative computed tomography angiography (CTA) has mitigated this challenge to some degree; yet it continues to pose certain challenges. The ability to map perforators with Mixed Reality has been demonstrated in case studies, but its accuracy has not been studied intraoperatively. Here, we compare the accuracy of "HoloDIEP" in identifying perforator location (vs. Doppler ultrasound) by using holographic 3D models derived from preoperative CTA.

METHODS

 Using a custom application on HoloLens, the deep inferior epigastric artery vascular tree was traced in 15 patients who underwent microsurgical breast reconstruction. Perforator markings were compared against the 3D model in a coordinate system centered on the umbilicus. Holographic- and Doppler-identified markings were compared using a perspective-corrected photo technique against the 3D model along with measurement of duration of perforator mapping for each technique.

RESULTS

 Vascular points in HoloDIEP skin markings were -0.97 ± 6.2 mm (perforators: -0.62 ± 6.13 mm) away from 3D-model ground-truth in radial length from the umbilicus at a true distance of 10.81 ± 6.14 mm (perforators: 11.40 ± 6.15 mm). Absolute difference in radial distance was twice as high for Doppler markings compared with Holo-markings (9.71 ± 6.16 and 4.02 ± 3.20 mm, respectively). Only in half of all cases (7/14), more than 50% of the Doppler-identified points were reasonably close (<30 mm) to 3D-model ground-truth. HoloDIEP was twice as fast as Doppler ultrasound (76.9s vs. 150.4 s per abdomen).

CONCLUSION

 HoloDIEP allows for faster and more accurate intraoperative perforator mapping than Doppler ultrasound.

Gothenburg Breast reconstruction (GoBreast) II protocol: a Swedish partially randomised patient preference, superiority trial comparing autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Although breast reconstruction is an integral part of breast cancer treatment, there is little high-quality evidence to indicate which method is the most effective. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are generally thought to provide the most solid scientific evidence, but there are significant barriers to conducting RCTs in breast reconstruction, making both recruitment and achieving unbiased and generalisable results a challenge. The objective of this study is to compare implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction in non-irradiated patients. Moreover, the study aims to improve the evidence for trial decision-making in breast reconstruction.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The study design partially randomised patient preference trial might be a way to overcome the aforementioned challenges. In the present study, patients who consent to randomisation will be randomised to implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction, whereas patients with strong preferences will be able to choose the method. The study is designed as a superiority trial based on the patient-reported questionnaire BREAST-Q and 124 participants will be randomised. In the preference cohort, patients will be included until 62 participants have selected the least popular alternative. Follow-up will be 60 months. Embedded qualitative studies and within-trial economic evaluation will be performed. The primary outcome is patient-reported breast-specific quality of life/satisfaction, and the secondary outcomes are complications, factors affecting satisfaction and cost-effectiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (2023-04754-01). Results will be published in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presented at peer-reviewed scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06195865.

Latissimus Dorsi Flap and Thoracodorsal Artery Perforator Flap with Immediate Fat Transfer (LIFT and TIFT): A Retrospective Study about Total Breast Reconstruction in High-Risk Patients

INTRODUCTION

Microsurgical breast reconstruction has become popular over the past twenty years and allows a tailor-tuck approach to each patient. However, smoking or coagulation disorders may switch surgeon's choice towards alternative options. When facing these risk factors, we performed pedicled latissimus dorsi (LD) flap and thoracodorsal artery perforator (TDAP) flap reconstruction with immediate fat transfer (LIFT and TIFT), achieving satisfactory surgical outcomes. Hence, we aim to present our seven-years case-series and discuss our decisional algorithm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Thirty smoker women and seven women affected by coagulation disorder (n = 37) respectively had LIFT and TIFT surgery and were retrospectively evaluated. Patients' demographics and outcomes were recorded and compared.

RESULTS

LIFT patients received higher volumes of immediate fat grafting compared to TIFT patients (p < 0.05), which required additional lipofilling to provide adequate volume amount, since the TDAP flap was not immediately grafted. However, the additional lipofilling procedures and fat volume were similar (p > 0.05). Flap survival reached 100%, and flap necrosis or loss did not occur. Few minor complications were evidenced in the LIFT group only (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Based on our experience, we support the reliability of pedicled LD and TDAP flaps with immediate fat transfer in breast reconstruction as valuable alternative to microsurgery in smokers (LIFT) and patients with coagulation disorders (TIFT). However, the results of our study are not conclusive since still must be clarified the role of the smoking and coagulation disorders in microsurgery and the real benefit of a non-microsurgical procedure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience, descriptive studies, or reports of expert committees. 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 .

Quantifying the Impact of Prepectoral Implant Conversion on Patient Satisfaction and Quality of Life

BACKGROUND

Conversion of subpectoral reconstruction to the prepectoral plane has been increasing in popularity. However, there is a paucity of research assessing patient-reported outcomes after this operation. The primary aim of this study was to examine patient-reported outcomes after conversion of implants from the subpectoral to prepectoral plane using the BREAST-Q.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively examined patients who underwent subpectoral-to-prepectoral implant conversion by three surgeons at two separate centers from 2017 through 2021. Patient demographics, primary indication for the conversion, surgical characteristics, postoperative outcomes, and BREAST-Q scores were obtained.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight breasts in 39 patients underwent implant conversion. The most common primary indications for implant conversion were chronic pain (41%), animation deformity (31%), and cosmetic concerns (28%). Average BREAST-Q scores improved significantly preoperatively to postoperatively in all the domains measured (satisfaction with breasts, satisfaction with implants, physical well-being, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being) ( P < 0.01). When examined by primary indication, all cohorts had significant preoperative to postoperative score improvement in satisfaction with breasts ( P < 0.001) and physical well-being ( P < 0.01) domains. Fifteen breasts (22%) developed postoperative complications, with implant loss in 9% of breasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Conversion of subpectoral implants to the prepectoral plane significantly improves BREAST-Q outcomes in all aspects, including patient satisfaction with breasts and implants, as well as psychosocial, physical, and sexual well-being. Implant conversion to the prepectoral plane is becoming the authors' primary solution for most patients with chronic pain, animation deformity, or cosmetic concerns after subpectoral reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Impact of the withdrawal of macrotextured implant on reconstruction practices

INTRODUCTION

On 22 November 2018, the French Society for Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery recommended that Allergan® macrotextured breast implants be recalled, a decision endorsed by the French national health products safety agency (ANSM) on 2nd April 2019. At the Georges-François Leclerc Cancer Center (CGFL) in Dijon, we decided to stop using macrotextured implants as of November 2018 in favor of smooth implants. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the impact of the recall of macrotextured implants on breast reconstruction surgical practices and their complications.

METHODS

This is a single-centre, retrospective study performed at the CGFL in Dijon, France. Reconstruction techniques and complications were compared between two periods, i.e. before the recall of macrotextured breast implants (period 1: 1st September 2017-November 22, 2018) and after the recall (period 2: 23 November 2018-31st March 2020). All patients who underwent breast reconstruction for the first time were included.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 168 reconstructions in period 2, and 159 in period 2. The rate of use of breast implants during reconstructions decreased significantly in period 2 (53.6% vs. 23.9%; P<0.001). The rate of autologous reconstructions increased significantly for muscle sparing latissimus dorsi (2.4% vs. 12.6%; P<0.001) and exclusive fat grafting (9.5% vs. 21.5%; P<0.01). Clavien-Dindo Stage IIIb complications decreased in period 2 (10% vs. 18.4%; P=0.04).

CONCLUSION

Since the recall of macrotextured breast implants, the reconstruction rate has decreased in our centre in favor of autologous techniques with lower complication rates.

Learning Sensory Nerve Coaptation in Free Flap Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 The aims of this study were to assess whether sensory nerve coaptation in free flap breast reconstruction is subject to learning, and to elucidate challenges of this technique.

METHODS

 In this single-center retrospective cohort study, we reviewed consecutive free flap breast reconstructions performed between March 2015 and August 2018. Data were extracted from medical records, and missing values were imputed. We assessed learning by exploring associations between case number and probability of successful nerve coaptation using a multivariable mixed-effects model. Sensitivity analysis was performed in a subgroup of cases with evidence of attempted coaptation. Recorded reasons for failed coaptation attempts were grouped into thematic categories. Multivariable mixed-effects models were used to examine associations between case number and postoperative mechanical detection threshold.

RESULTS

 Nerve coaptation was completed in 250 of 564 (44%) included breast reconstructions. Success rates varied considerably between surgeons (range 21-78%). In the total sample, the adjusted odds of successful nerve coaptation increased 1.03-fold for every unit increase in case number (95% confidence interval 1.01-1.05, p < 0.05), but sensitivity analysis refuted this apparent learning effect (adjusted odds ratio 1.00, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.01, p = 0.34). The most frequently recorded reasons for failed nerve coaptation attempts were inability to locate a donor or recipient nerve. Postoperative mechanical detection thresholds showed a negligible, positive association with case number (estimate 0.00, 95% confidence interval 0.00-0.01, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

 This study does not provide evidence in support of a learning process for nerve coaptation in free flap breast reconstruction. Nevertheless, the identified technical challenges suggest that surgeons may benefit from training visual search skills, familiarizing with relevant anatomy, and practicing techniques for achieving tensionless coaptation. This study complements prior studies exploring therapeutic benefit of nerve coaptation by addressing technical feasibility.

Systematic review of cost-effectiveness in breast reconstruction: deep inferior epigastric perforator flap vs. implant-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

There are several techniques for reconstructing breasts after mastectomy, but little scientific evidence for which technique is superior. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the cost-effectiveness of implant-based and autologous reconstruction and to evaluate the overall certainty of evidence, as well as the quality of reporting of the included studies.

METHODS

Studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap compared to implant-based reconstruction, meeting criteria defined in a PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome), were included. Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, CinahL, EconLit, and NHS EED databases were searched. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence, and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) 2022 was used to evaluate the quality of reporting.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

A total of 256 abstracts were retrieved from the search, and after scrutiny, seven studies were included. The findings of this present systematic review should be interpreted with caution as the overall certainty of evidence is low (GRADE ƟƟОО). The included studies suggest that DIEP-flaps are cost-effective compared with implant-based breast reconstruction when the applied cost-effectiveness thresholds of $50,000 to $100,000 per quality-adjusted life years are used. It is noteworthy that no high level evidence exists regarding cost-effeciency, to support recommendations and decision in breast reconstruction. Methodological issues that can be improved in future studies are presented.

[Indocyanine green is an integral part of breast reconstructive surgery using perforator flaps]

INTRODUCTION

The use of allotransplants for breast reconstruction in surgical stage of the the breast cancer treatment requires tissue perfusion control. The aim of the study was to analyze the effectiveness of using indocyanine green as a drug for determining the perfusion of perforant flaps in breast reconstructive surgery.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A retrospective series of observations of 27 breast reconstructions using autologous transplants is presented: 19 reconstructions with DIEP-flap, 2 with SIEA-flap, 5 with TD-flap; 1 with thoracoepigastric flap. Intraoperative fluorescence angiography was performed using a Stryker device (5900 Optical Court, USA). The intensity of the flap fluorescence was recorded after intravenous bolus injection of 7.5 mg indocyanine green.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The optimal time interval from the moment of drug administration to indicative visualization of flap perfusion was 55-60 seconds. In all patients, the area of insufficient blood flow was excised within intensively blood-supplied tissues, according to mapping data with the indocyanine green. With free transplant of flaps postoperative complications during follow-up were recorded in 1 (4.8%) case (marginal necrosis), which is associated with insufficient compression of auxiliary vessels (violation of the dominant vessel contrast technique). With non-free transplant of flaps no complications were detected in the postoperative period.

CONCLUSIONS

Indocyanine green allows to prevent necrotic changes and reduce the rehabilitation period. The optimal time for the indicative visualization of flap perfusion was 55-60 seconds. The use of indocyanine green in free transplant of flaps ensured a postoperative period without complications in 20 (95.2%) cases, in non-free flap transplantation - in 6 (100%) cases.

Local heating-induced cutaneous vasodilation in reinnervated and noninnervated deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps

INTRODUCTION

Cutaneous vascular reactivity to local heating in free flaps has not been characterized. We aimed to assess local heating-induced cutaneous vasodilation in reinnervated and noninnervated deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional study of 21 female patients with an uncomplicated unilateral delayed DIEP breast reconstruction at least 2 years after surgery. DIEP flaps and contralateral breasts were subjected to direct local heating, and skin blood flow was assessed using laser-Doppler flowmetry. To evaluate sensory-nerve-fiber function, touch perception thresholds were assessed using a 20-piece Touch-test™ Sensory Evaluator, and cutaneous warm detection and heat pain thresholds were measured using a TSA-II device.

RESULTS

Of the participants, 10 had a reinnervated DIEP flap with a single coapted nerve (mean flap weight, 610 ± 296 g) and 11 had a noninnervated DIEP flap (mean flap weight, 613 ± 169 g). Mean age was 58 ± 11 years, mean follow-up time was 5 ± 1 years, and mean BMI was 24 ± 3 kg/m2 . DIEP flaps exhibited significantly weaker cutaneous vasodilation in response to local heating than contralateral breasts (median peak skin blood flow, 59 [25th-75th percentile, 36-71] a.u. for DIEP flaps versus 94 [74-141] a.u. for contralateral breasts; p < .001). The magnitude of the response was similar between reinnervated and noninnervated flaps (median peak skin blood flow, 55 [25th-75th percentile, 39-68] a.u. for reinnervated DIEP flaps versus 66 [36-77] a.u. for noninnervated DIEP flaps; p = .75). Of participants with reinnervated DIEP flaps, 90% perceived heat pain below the 50°C safety threshold, as compared to 36% of participants with noninnervated DIEP flaps (two-tailed p = .02).

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that free flap transfer causes longstanding impairment, yet not complete abolition, of both the sensory nerve-mediated and nitric oxide-dependent local heating-induced cutaneous vasodilatory systems. We found no statistical evidence that flap reinnervation improves the ability to raise skin blood flow in response to local heating.

Long-term patient-reported outcomes of immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer: population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction is offered to improve quality of life for women after mastectomy for breast cancer, but information regarding the long-term patient-reported outcomes of different reconstruction procedures is currently lacking. The Brighter study aimed to evaluate long-term patient-reported outcomes after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) in a population-based cohort.

METHODS

Women who underwent mastectomy with IBR for breast cancer in England between 1 January 2008 and 31 March 2009 were identified from National Health Service Hospital Episode Statistics. Surviving women were invited to complete the BREAST-Q, EQ-5D-5L™, and ICECAP-A at least 12 years after the index procedure. Questionnaires were scored according to developers' instructions and compared by IBR type.

RESULTS

Some 1236 women underwent IBR; 343 (27.8 per cent) had 2-stage expander/implant, 630 (51.0 per cent) latissimus dorsi, and 263 (21.3 per cent) abdominal flap reconstructions, with a mean(s.d.) follow-up of 13.3(0.5) years. Women who underwent abdominal flap reconstruction reported higher scores in all BREAST-Q domains than those who had other procedures. These differences remained statistically significant and clinically meaningful after adjusting for age, ethnicity, geographical region, socioeconomic status, smoking, BMI, and complications. The greatest difference was seen in scores for satisfaction with breasts; women who had abdominal flap reconstructions reported scores that were 13.17 (95 per cent c.i. 9.48 to 16.87) points; P < 0.001) higher than those among women who had two-stage expander/implant procedures. Women who underwent latissimus dorsi reconstruction reported significantly more pain/discomfort on the EQ-5D-5L™, but no other differences between procedures were seen.

CONCLUSION

Long-term patient-reported outcomes are significantly better following abdominal flap reconstruction than other traditional procedure types. These findings should be shared with women considering IBR to help them make informed decisions about their surgical options.

Trends of Autologous Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction and Safety during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

 Autologous free-flap breast reconstruction (ABR) is a valuable surgical option for patients following mastectomy. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a myriad of factors that have affected access to care, hospital logistics, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to identify differences in patient selection, hospital course and severity, and postoperative outcomes for patients who underwent ABR during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

 Patients undergoing ABR from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2019 to 2020 database were analyzed to compare sociodemographics, hospital course, and outcomes over the first postoperative month. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors predictive of complications based on the operative year.

RESULTS

 In total, 3,770 breast free flaps were stratified into two groups based on the timing of reconstruction (prepandemic and pandemic groups). Patients with a diagnosis of disseminated cancer were significantly less likely to undergo ABR during the COVID-19 pandemic. On univariate analysis, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications between the two groups. When controlling for potentially confounding sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, the COVID-19 group was significantly more likely to undergo reoperation compared with the prepandemic group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

 When comparing outcomes for patients who underwent ABR prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found a significant increase in the odds of reoperation for those who had ABR during the pandemic. Debridement procedures and exploration for postoperative hemorrhage, thrombosis, or infection increased in the prepandemic group compared to the COVID-19 group. Notably, operative times decreased.

Short-Term Quality of Life after Autologous Compared with Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of this prospective multicenter study was to evaluate whether autologous breast reconstruction (BR) leads to lower short-term quality of life (QoL) compared with alloplastic BR, due to the more physically demanding surgery and increased risk of severe complications of autologous BR.

METHODS

Changes in QoL after BR were measured in this prospective multicenter study using the BREAST-Q questionnaire, which was administered preoperatively and at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively. Characteristics and complications, classified according to Clavien-Dindo, were compared between alloplastic and autologous groups. Profile plots and generalized linear regression models were constructed to analyze the BREAST-Q subscales over time for both BR groups.

RESULTS

Preoperatively, women undergoing autologous BR scored lower on all BREAST-Q scales compared with women undergoing alloplastic BR, regardless of whether they underwent immediate or delayed BR. Women undergoing autologous BR scored higher at 6 weeks and 6 months postoperatively on the Satisfaction with Breasts ( P = 0.001), Psychosocial Well-Being ( P = 0.024), and Sexual Well-Being ( P = 0.007) subscales. Postoperative Physical Well-Being: Chest score was similar between the groups ( P = 0.533). Clavien-Dindo grade III or higher complications occurred more often among women in the autologous group (27% versus 12%, P = 0.042). Complications were not associated with worse BREAST-Q scores on any of the subscales.

CONCLUSIONS

In contrast to the authors' expectations, and despite the higher incidence of severe complications and lower preoperative breast satisfaction and QoL scores, women undergoing autologous BR had higher levels of breast satisfaction and psychosocial and sexual well-being, both at 6 weeks and 6 months after BR, compared with women undergoing alloplastic BR.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, II.

Psychological impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on breast cancer patients

PURPOSE

The COVID-19 pandemic uniquely impacted patients with breast cancer as mastectomies were allowed to proceed, yet breast reconstruction surgeries were halted. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on the rates of breast reconstruction and patients' well-being.

METHODS

A chart review included all patients who underwent mastectomy from December 2019 to September 2021. Patients were contacted by a member of the research team and asked to participate in a COVID-19-specific survey and to complete the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Patients were then grouped into "surge" or "nonsurge" groups based on the date of mastectomy.

RESULTS

Two hundred and fifty-nine patients were included in this study. During the study period, 42% (n = 111) of the patients underwent breast reconstruction. The "surge" group included 106 patients whereas the "nonsurge" group included 153 patients. Fewer patients began breast reconstruction during the surge period compared with the nonsurge period (34.0% vs. 49.0%, p = 0.017). Eighty-six patients participated in the COVID-19 survey. Forty-one percent (n = 35) of the patients felt that their care was disrupted because of COVID-19. Eighty-three patients completed the HADS survey. Overall, 16.8% and 15.7% of the respondents fell into the moderate to severe ranges for both anxiety and depression scales, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with breast cancer have faced increased difficulties with access to breast reconstruction throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. Our institution demonstrated decreased rates of breast reconstruction and an increase in anxiety and depression. The positive benefits of breast reconstruction cannot be overlooked when determining resource allocation in the future.

Comparing the Outcomes and Complication Rates of Biologic vs Synthetic Meshes in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review evaluates all published studies comparing biologic and synthetic meshes in implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR), to determine which category of mesh produces the most favorable outcomes.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women globally. Implant-based breast reconstruction is currently the most popular method of postmastectomy reconstruction, and recently, the use of surgical mesh in IBBR has become commonplace. Although there is a long-standing belief among surgeons that biologic mesh is superior to synthetic mesh in terms of surgical complications and patient outcomes, few studies exist to support this claim.

METHODS

A systematic search of the EMBASE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases was performed in January 2022. Primary literature studies comparing biologic and synthetic meshes within the same experimental framework were included. Study quality and bias were assessed using the validated Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies criteria.

RESULTS

After duplicate removal, 109 publications were reviewed, with 12 meeting the predetermined inclusion criteria. Outcomes included common surgical complications, histological analysis, interactions with oncologic therapies, quality of life measures, and esthetic outcomes. Across all 12 studies, synthetic meshes were rated as at least equivalent to biologic meshes for every reported outcome. On average, the studies in this review tended to have moderate Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies scores.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review offers the first comprehensive evaluation of all publications comparing biologic and synthetic meshes in IBBR. The consistent finding that synthetic meshes are at least equivalent to biologic meshes across a range of clinical outcomes offers a compelling argument in favor of prioritizing the use of synthetic meshes in IBBR.

Comprehensive Care of Women With Genetic Predisposition to Breast and Ovarian Cancer

Women at risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndromes are frequently seen in primary care and gynecology clinics. They present with a distinctive set of clinical and emotional needs that revolve around complex risk management discussions and decision making. The care of these women calls for the creation of individualized care plans that facilitate adjustment to the mental and physical changes associated with their choices. This article provides an update on comprehensive evidence-driven care of women with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The aim of this review is to aid clinicians in identifying those at risk for hereditary cancer syndromes and provide practical advice on patient-centered medical and surgical risk management. Topics of discussion include enhanced surveillance, preventive medications, risk-reducing mastectomy and reconstruction, risk-reducing bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy, fertility, sexuality, and menopausal management, with attention to the importance of psychological support. High-risk patients may benefit from a multidisciplinary team that provides realistic expectations with consistent messaging. The primary care provider must be aware of the special needs of these patients and the consequences of their risk management interventions.

Quality of Life 9 to 13 Years after Autologous or Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction: Which Breast Remains Best?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to evaluate the long-term patient satisfaction and quality of life 9 to 13 years after autologous versus alloplastic breast reconstruction and compare the data to those of an earlier study.

METHODS

This is a 9-year follow-up study of 92 women who underwent breast reconstruction (47 autologous and 45 alloplastic) between 2006 and 2010 and filled out the BREAST-Q questionnaire in 2010. Changes in BREAST-Q scores were analyzed by using a change score from baseline (2010) to follow-up (2019), which was presented by a mean change score with 95% confidence intervals. Linear regression analyses were performed to test which patient characteristics were related to the BREAST-Q change scores.

RESULTS

The response rate at follow-up was 60% (25 autologous and 30 alloplastic). Responders at follow-up had a lower body mass index and had less frequently undergone unilateral breast reconstruction compared to the nonresponders. Women undergoing both autologous and alloplastic breast reconstruction had significantly decreased satisfaction with breasts (-4 points), satisfaction with outcome (-8 points), and satisfaction with nipples (-20 points) over time. None of the patient characteristics, including reconstruction technique, were related to the BREAST-Q change scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Satisfaction with breasts, satisfaction with outcome, and satisfaction with nipples decreased slightly over time for women undergoing alloplastic and autologous breast reconstruction. Women undergoing autologous breast reconstruction seemed to remain more satisfied with their breasts 9 to 13 years after breast reconstruction compared to women undergoing alloplastic breast reconstruction. Because of the small sample size, conclusions should be carefully drawn. However, the results were in line with the expectations based on previous literature.

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 .

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.

Does breast oncoplastic surgery improve quality of life?

Breast Oncoplastic Surgery (OS) has established itself as a safe procedure associated with the treatment of breast cancer, but the term is broad, encompassing procedures associated with breast-conserving surgeries (BCS), conservative mastectomies and fat grafting. Surgeons believe that OS is associated with an increase in quality of life (QOL), but the diversity of QOL questionnaires and therapeutic modalities makes it difficult to assess from the patient's perspective. To answer this question, we performed a search for systematic reviews on QOL associated with different COM procedures, and in their absence, we selected case-control studies, discussing the main results. We observed that: (1) Patients undergoing BCS or breast reconstruction have improved QoL compared to those undergoing mastectomy; (2) In patients undergoing BCS, OS has not yet shown an improvement in QOL, a fact possibly influenced by patient selection bias; (3) In patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction, the QoL results are superior when the reconstruction is performed with autologous flaps and when the areola is preserved; (4) Prepectoral implants improves QOL in relation to subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction; (5) ADM do not improves QOL; (6) In patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomy, satisfaction is high with the indication, but the patient must be informed about the potential complications associated with the procedure; (7) Satisfaction is high after performing fat grafting. It is observed that, in general, OS increases QOL, and when evaluating the procedures, any preservation or repair, or the use of autologous tissues, increases QOL, justifying OS.

Patient Reported Outcome and Quality of Life After Delayed Breast Reconstruction - An RCT Comparing Different Reconstructive Methods in Radiated and Non-radiated Patients

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is one of the core outcomes for breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the method of delayed breast reconstruction affects long-term HRQoL.

METHODS

Participants were divided into 2 arms depending on previous radiotherapy, and subsequently randomized between 2 methods of breast reconstruction: a latissimus dorsi flap or a deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap in the radiated arm and a thoracodorsal flap and implant or an expander in the non-radiated arm. Validated HRQoL instruments were used: BREAST-Q to evaluate breast specific HRQoL and satisfaction, RAND-36 and EQ-5D to evaluate generic HRQoL, and BDI-21 to measure symptoms of depression and anxiety.

RESULTS

During the recruitment period (2009-2015), 233 patients were randomized. After opt-outs and exclusions, the remaining 107 participants comprise the study sample. Postoperative HrQoL was measured on average 7to 8years post-operatively. Response rates varied between 60 and 82 per cent. The BREAST-Q scores were higher after the reconstruction than before for the great majority of domains in both arms; albeit statistically significant only between the 2 methods for physical well-being chest in the radiated arm. Most participants in both arms had minimal or mild depression both before and after the operation.

CONCLUSION

No distinct differences in long-term HrQoL could be seen for different methods There was a clear improvement in HrQoL compared to pre-reconstruction in all groups, but the effect of specific reconstructive methods on scores could not be reliably demonstrated.

Prognostic effect of radiotherapy in breast cancer patients underwent immediate reconstruction after mastectomy

INTRODUCTION

It is still unclear whether radiotherapy affects the long-term survival of breast cancer (BC) patients after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). This study aims to evaluate the actual prognostic impact of radiotherapy on BC patients undergoing IBR, and to construct survival prediction models to predict the survival benefit of radiotherapy.

METHODS

Data on eligible BC patients were retrieved from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Competing risk models were used to assess breast cause-specific death (BCSD) and non-breast cancer cause-specific death (NBCSD). Kaplan-Meier curve, Cox risk regression model and forest map were used to evaluate and demonstrate overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS). Survival prediction nomograms were used to predict OS and BCSS probabilities.

RESULTS

A total of 22,218 patients were selected, 24.9% received radiotherapy and 75.1% were without radiotherapy. Competing risk models showed that whether BCSD or NBCSD, the cumulative long-term risk of death in the radiotherapy group was higher than that in the non-radiotherapy group. The Kaplan-Meier curve showed that patients with different lymph node metastasis had different radiotherapy benefits. Multivariate stratified analysis showed that radiotherapy after autologous reconstruction was associated with poor BCSS in patients with stage N0, and radiotherapy after autologous reconstruction and combined reconstruction improved OS and BCSS in patients with stage N3. The C-indexes of nomogram (between 0.778 and 0.847) and calibration curves showed the good prediction ability of survival prediction model.

CONCLUSIONS

Radiotherapy can improve OS and BCSS in N3 stage BC patients undergoing immediate autologous reconstruction after mastectomy. The practical nomograms can be used to predict OS and BCSS of patients with or without radiotherapy, which is helpful for individualized treatment.

Psychosocial and sexual well-being in breast cancer survivors undergoing immediate breast reconstruction: The mediating role of breast satisfaction

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to explore (1) the levels of quality of life (psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being) and breast satisfaction in breast cancer patients (BCP) after immediate reconstruction (IR), considering surgery reason and surgical technique, and (2) the explanatory and predictive capacity of psychosocial well-being on breast satisfaction, and of both on sexual well-being.

METHODS

This prospective study included 36 BCP who underwent IR between June 2006 and December 2014.

RESULTS

Highest levels of quality of life were found in psychosocial well-being and sexual well-being, with no statistically significant differences by surgery reason or surgical technique in any quality of life indicator or breast satisfaction. Psychosocial, physical well-being and breast satisfaction explained 56.16% of the variance in sexual well-being, where 44.67% was attributed to psychosocial well-being. In addition, breast satisfaction statistically significantly mediated the relationship between psychosocial and sexual well-being, independently of physical well-being.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the importance of IR in reducing psychological morbidity and preserving the quality of life and breast satisfaction. Furthermore, this research indicated that psychosocial well-being should be considered a useful personal resource for improving the sexual well-being of BCP undergoing IR both through its direct effect and the mediated effect of breast satisfaction.

The relationship between immediate postmastectomy reconstruction modalities and survival benefits in patients with triple negative breast cancer

INTRODUCTION

Immediate postmastectomy reconstruction for breast cancer has been widely used due to its unique esthetic and psychological effects. However, no other population-based study has investigated the effects of different reconstruction types on the survival in patients with triple negative breast cancer (TNBC).

METHODS

We selected patients who met the eligibility criteria from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results cancer registry (N = 9760). We then assessed the effect of different reconstructive surgical approaches (implant, autologous, implant and autologous combined reconstruction) on the overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) by using the Kaplan-Meier survival curve and Cox proportional hazard regression analyses. The nomograms were used to predict OS and BCSS. And the competitive risk model was used to assess breast cancer-specific death (BCSD) and non-breast cancer-specific death (NBCSD).

RESULTS

Statistical analysis suggested that the three reconstruction methods had better OS and BCSS with lower hazard than mastectomy alone (log-rank test, p < 0.05). Multivariate stratified analysis showed that patients aged 40-60 years had the greatest improvement in OS (Adjusted hazard ratio [AHR], 0.646; 95% Confidence Interval [CI], 0.439-0.950; p = 0.026) with combined reconstruction. BCSS could be improved only by implant reconstruction (AHR, 0.672; 95% CI, 0.514-0.878; p = 0.004). In addition, autologous reconstruction (AHR, 0.570; 95% CI, 0.350-0.929; p = 0.024) and implant reconstruction (AHR, 0.538; 95% CI, 0.339-0.853; p = 0.008) improved OS in patients >60 years of age. The survival prediction model quantified the survival benefits of TNBC patients undergoing different surgeries. Moreover, the C-indexes showed the good predictive ability of the nomograms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that for TNBC patients, there is a survival benefit of immediate postmastectomy reconstruction compared with mastectomy alone. Among them, implant reconstruction has the most obvious advantage.

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.

Best Practices for BREAST-Q Research: A Systematic Review of Study Methodology

BACKGROUND

Data heterogeneity and methodologic errors hinder the ability to draw clinically meaningful conclusions from studies using the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module patient-reported outcome measure. In this systematic review, the authors evaluate the quality of BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module administration in relation to the BREAST-Q version 2.0 user's guide and the reporting of key methodology characteristics. The authors also describe a framework for improving the quality of BREAST-Q data analysis and reporting.

METHODS

The authors conducted a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Ovid HAPI databases to identify articles on the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module to assess postmastectomy breast reconstruction outcomes. The authors registered the protocol before study implementation on Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/c5236 ) and adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Data on mode of BREAST-Q administration, time horizon justification, and sample size calculation were collected.

RESULTS

The authors included 185 studies in the analysis. Errors in BREAST-Q administration were identified in 36 studies (19.5 percent). Appropriate administration of the BREAST-Q could not be determined in 63 studies (34.1 percent) because of insufficient reporting. Time horizon for the primary outcome was reported in 71 studies (38.4 percent), with only 17 (9.2 percent) reporting a sample size calculation.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors identified important yet actionable shortcomings in the BREAST-Q literature. Researchers are encouraged to review the BREAST-Q user's guide in the study design phase to mitigate errors in patient-reported outcome measure administration and reporting for future trials using the BREAST-Q Reconstruction Module. Adhering to these guidelines will allow for greater clinical utility and generalizability of BREAST-Q research.

Breaking Barriers to Breast Reconstruction among Socioeconomically Disadvantaged Patients at a Large Safety-net Hospital

Socioeconomic disparities remain prevalent among those who undergo breast reconstruction. At our institution, patients must meet certain criteria to become eligible for breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of socioeconomic factors on breast reconstruction eligibility, enrollment, choice, and completion at our large safety-net institution.

Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Autologous versus Implant-Based Reconstruction following Infected Breast Device Explantation

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction infections often require implant explantation. Whereas some plastic surgeons pursue autologous reconstruction following the first implant-based breast reconstruction failure caused by infection, others argue that a second attempt is acceptable.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective study of patients who underwent a second reconstruction attempt with implant-based or free flap breast reconstruction following explantation because of infection between 2006 and 2019. Surgical and patient-reported outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

A total of 6093 implant-based breast reconstructions were performed during the study period, of which 130 breasts met our inclusion criteria [implant-based, n = 86 (66 percent); free flap, n = 44 (34 percent)]. No significant differences in rates of overall (25 percent versus 36 percent; p = 0.2) or major (20 percent versus 21 percent; p = 0.95) complications were identified between the free flap and implant-based cohorts, respectively. Implant-based breast reconstruction patients were more likely to experience a second infection (27 percent versus 2 percent; p = 0.0007) and reconstruction failure (21 percent versus 5 percent; p = 0.019). Among irradiated patients, reconstruction failure was reported in 44 percent of the implant-based and 7 percent of the free flap cohorts (p = 0.02). Free flap patients reported significantly higher scores for Satisfaction with Breasts (73.7 ± 20.1 versus 48.5 ± 27.9; p = 0.0046).

CONCLUSIONS

Following implant-based breast reconstruction explantation because of infection, implant-based and free flap breast reconstruction had similar rates of overall and major complications; however, implant-based breast reconstruction had considerably higher rates of infection and reconstructive failures and lower patient-reported scores for Satisfaction with Breasts. Given the high rates of implant-based breast reconstruction failure in patients with prior radiotherapy and infection-based failure, plastic surgeons should strongly consider autologous reconstruction in this patient population.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

The effect of sarcopenic obesity and muscle quality on complications after DIEP-flap breast reconstruction

Introduction

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether sarcopenic obesity and muscle quality as expressed by skeletal muscle radiodensity (SMD) are associated to postoperative complications in women undergoing DIEP-flap breast reconstruction (BR).

Methods

All patients who underwent DIEP-flap BR at our tertiary center between 2010 and 2018 were asked to sign informed consent for the use of their electronic medical records and images. By outlining anatomical skeletal muscle contours on the preoperative abdominal CT-scan at lumbar level L3, SMD and skeletal muscle indices (SMI) were measured by two observers independently. Using logistic regression analyses, the association between sarcopenic obesity (BMI >25 & SMI <39), low SMD (<40HU), and Clavien-Dindo (CD) grade ≥ II complications was evaluated. In this way odds ratios (OR) and adjusted odds ratios (OR_adjusted) were provided.

Results

Out of the 103 patients included in this study, 36% had CD grade ≥ II complications within 30 days of surgery. Twenty patients (19%) suffered from sarcopenic obesity of whom eleven patients (55%) had CD grade ≥ II complications (OR = 2.7, p = 0.05). In a multivariate analysis, sarcopenic obesity was not significantly related to a higher complication rate (OR_adjusted = 2.2, p = 0.14) but women with SMD below average and those with prior radiotherapy had a higher risk for grade ≥ II complications (OR_adjusted = 2.9, p = 0.02 and OR_adjusted = 2.7, p = 0.02 respectively).

Conclusion

Below average SMD (<40HU) was found to be associated with the development of postoperative CD grade ≥ II complications in women undergoing DIEP-flap BR. Future research should evaluate whether improving SMD reduces the complication incidence in this patient group.

The Impact of Abdominal Liposuction on Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Prior abdominal liposuction can be viewed as a relative or absolute contraindication to abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction given concerns for damaged perforators and scarring complicating intraoperative dissection. This systematic review aims to explore the outcomes of abdominally based breast reconstruction in patients with a history of abdominal liposuction. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses-guided literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from the earliest available date through June 2020. Deep inferior epigastric perforator, muscle-sparing transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (TRAM), superficial inferior epigastric artery, and pedicled TRAM flaps were included for evaluation. Complications included total or partial flap loss, fat necrosis, seroma, delayed wound healing, and donor site complications. After inclusion criteria were applied, 336 nonduplicate articles were screened, yielding 11 for final review, representing 55 flaps in 43 patients. There was no instance of total flap loss, eight (14.5%) flaps developed partial loss or fat necrosis, three (5.4%) flaps had delayed wound healing, and two (4.6%) patients had donor site complications. Most authors (8/11) utilized some type of preoperative imaging. Doppler ultrasonography was the most used modality, and these patients had the lowest rate of partial flap loss or flap fat necrosis (8%), followed by those without any preoperative imaging (10%). In conclusion, this review supports that patients undergoing abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction with a history of abdominal liposuction are not at an increased risk of flap or donor site complications. Although preoperative imaging was common, it did not reliably decrease complications. Further prospective studies are needed to address the role of imaging in improving outcomes.

Minimizing Postoperative Pain in Autologous Breast Reconstruction With the Omental Fat-Augmented Free Flap

INTRODUCTION

The omental fat-augmented free flap (O-FAFF) is a recently developed technique for autologous breast reconstruction. Our aim of the study is to evaluate the outcomes of our early case series. We assess the O-FAFF donor site morbidity in terms of postoperative pain, narcotic, and antiemetic use.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients undergoing O-FAFF from 2019 to 2021 was performed. Patients were evaluated for demographic data, operative time, hospital course, and complications. Mean pain scores (1-10 scale) and narcotic pain medication use in oral morphine equivalents and doses of antiemetic medications during their hospital course were analyzed. We compared outcomes of our O-FAFF group with those of a control group of patients who underwent breast reconstruction with traditional free abdominal tissue transfer.

RESULTS

A total of 14 patients underwent O-FAFF breast reconstruction, representing 23 breasts. Patients had an average age of 48.5 years (±2.3 years) and body mass index of 22.6 kg/m 2 (±1.09 kg/m 2 ). Average follow-up was 232 days (±51 days). Average mastectomy weight was 245.6 g (±30.2 g) and average O-FAFF weight was 271 g (±31.7 g). Average pain scores on postoperative day 1 (POD1), POD2, and POD3 were 3.1 (±0.28), 2.8 (±0.21), and 2.1 (±0.35), respectively. The average narcotic use by patients in oral morphine equivalents on POD1, POD2, and POD3 are 24.3 (±5.5), 21.9 (±4.6), and 6.2 (±2.4), respectively. Total narcotic use during hospital stay was 79.4 mg (±11.1 mg). Average pain scores and narcotic use are significantly lower when compared with a previously published cohort of patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction with free abdominal tissue transfer ( P < 0.05). Average antiemetic use was lower in the O-FAFF group compared with the control group: 3.5 versus 4.8 doses ( P = 0.6). Hospital length of stay was 3.0 days (±0.0 days). No complications were noted (0%). Patients were universally satisfied with their reconstructive outcome (100%).

CONCLUSIONS

The O-FAFF is proven to be a viable method of autologous breast reconstruction. Early series of patients undergoing O-FAFF reconstruction suggest a lower donor site morbidity as demonstrated by lower postoperative pain scores and lower consumptions of narcotic pain medications.

Defining the Ideal Breast Reconstruction Procedure After Mastectomy From the Patient Perspective: A Retrospective Analysis

Background:

An increasing number of breast cancer patients undergo immediate or secondary breast reconstruction, but the ideal method in terms of patient satisfaction remains ambiguous. We compared the 3 most common breast reconstruction techniques to determine patient satisfaction and objective outcomes.

Methods:

Retrospective study of 184 patients with breast cancer who underwent a reconstructive procedure between 1993 and 2011 at our institution. Procedures evaluated were implant-based reconstruction (IBR) alone, latissimus dorsi (LD) flap reconstruction with/without implant, and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) free flap reconstruction. A retrospective patient satisfaction questionnaire was sent to all women. Twenty patients from each subgroup were matched to conduct a standardized objective assessment of the sensitivity of their reconstructed breast. A blinded photographic evaluation was also performed by 3 independent observers to assess the esthetic aspect and symmetry.

Results:

DIEP obtained significantly higher average scores regarding the esthetic outcome, immediate reconstruction impact, and overall score in the questionnaire evaluation. The IBR had the best results in the somatosensory evaluation, with DIEP scoring better than LD. DIEP received higher scores on average than LD for the criteria of size and symmetry in the esthetic evaluation. No statistically significant differences were observed between IBR and DIEP.

Conclusions:

Good results were reported overall for all breast reconstruction procedures, with more reserved scores for LD. The DIEP reconstruction appeared to be the most satisfactory and best experienced reconstruction method for patients, despite the complexity of the intervention. Clinicians should be encouraged to consider DIEP as the principal choice for breast reconstruction.

Long-Term Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

The most widely used method for breast reconstruction in Taiwan is alloplastic breast reconstruction, and traditionally, it can be categorized into immediate or delayed, single-stage or 2-stage procedures. We evaluated clinical outcomes and analyzed patients' self-reported satisfaction and quality of life after alloplastic breast reconstruction based on a previous preliminary study.

PATIENT AND METHODS

The patients who underwent primary alloplastic breast reconstruction after mastectomy were recruited in 2006 to 2020 at a single institute in Taiwan. The assessment of clinical outcomes was conducted by retrospective chart review and risk analysis. The patients also completed the BREAST-Q, a condition-specific patient-reported outcome measure, at least 6 months after treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 237 patients with 247 reconstructed breasts were enrolled in this study. The demographics showed that 205 (83%) were reconstructed using a 2-stage tissue expander-based procedure and 42 (17%) were 1-stage direct-to-implant reconstructions. The mean follow-up time was 79.5 months. The clinical assessment revealed that the overall complication rate was 34%, with infection being the most common (21 patients; 8%). According to risk analysis, smoking (odds ratio, 7.626; 95% confidence interval, 1.56-37.30; P = 0.012), and nipple-sparing mastectomy (odds ratio, 3.281; 95% confidence interval, 1.54-6.99; P = 0.002) were significant risk factors for overall complications. The questionnaire response rate was 38% (94 of 247), at least 6 months after treatment. The total mean score was 69.78.

CONCLUSIONS

At a single institute in Taiwan from 2006 to 2020, alloplastic breast reconstruction, either single- or 2-stage, have acceptable complication rate and good postoperative satisfaction based on patient-reported outcomes. Both patient- and surgery-related factors presented as significant risk factors. Precise patient selection and comprehensive discussion between the patient and physician may play the important role to achieve optimal aesthetic outcomes.

[Techniques and complications of non-genetic risk reducing mastectomies: Guidelines of the National College of French Gynecologists and Obstetricians (CNGOF)]

OBJECTIVE

Based on an updated review of the international literature covering the different surgical techniques and complications of risk reducing mastectomies (RRM) in non-genetic context, the Commission of Senology (CS) of the College National des Gynécologues Obstétriciens Français (CNGOF) aimed to establish recommendations on the techniques to be chosen and their implementation.

DESIGN

The CNGOF CS, composed of 24 experts, developed these recommendations. A policy of declaration and monitoring of links of interest was applied throughout the process of making the recommendations. Similarly, the development of these recommendations did not benefit from any funding from a company marketing a health product. The CS adhered to and followed the AGREE II (Advancing guideline development, reporting and evaluation in healthcare) criteria and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) method to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. The potential drawbacks of making recommendations in the presence of poor quality or insufficient evidence were highlighted.

METHODS

The CS considered 6 questions in 4 thematic areas, focusing on oncologic safety, risk of complications, aesthetic satisfaction and psychological impact, and preoperative modalities.

RESULTS

The application of the GRADE method resulted in 7 recommendations, 6 with a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and 1 with a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±).

CONCLUSION

There was significant agreement among the CS members on recommendations for preferred surgical techniques and practical implementation.

Breast Reconstruction: Necessity for Further Standardization of the Current Surgical Techniques Attempting to Facilitate Scientific Evaluation and Select Tailored Individualized Procedures Optimizing Patient Satisfaction

Background

Various breast cancer reconstruction methods and novel surgical techniques include autologous or allogenic procedures, which can increase patient's quality of life and provide options when dealing with patients seen as challenging clinical scenarios.

Summary

Our aim was to review the current literature and present published evidence on innovative standards in whole breast reconstruction. Advances in flap monitoring or newly published data regarding neurotization in breast reconstruction, arm lymphedema management, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma reconstruction treatment, and robotic surgery with regard to radiotherapy define innovative standards in the breast reconstruction setting. The role of meshes/acellular dermal matrix and fat grafting as well as optimal sequencing of postmastectomy radiotherapy in autologous and alloplastic breast reconstruction appear highly debatable also in expert panel meetings rendering further clinical research including RCTs imperative.

Key Messages

There is an abundance of novel available techniques, which mandate further standardization, facilitating scientific evaluation in an attempt to help surgeons select tailored procedures for each patient with the goal to promote informed decision-making in breast reconstruction.

Breast Reconstruction-Prospective Follow up on Breast Cancer Patients' Health-Related Quality of Life

Background

Analysing the results of breast reconstruction is important both in terms of oncological safety and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is thought to be prone to complications and heavy for patients with no time to adapt to having cancer. Delayed reconstruction (DR) is an option after primary surgery and oncological treatments, but requires patients to go through two recovery periods after surgery.

Methods

A prospective study of 1065 breast cancer patients with repeated measurement of HRQoL with both generic (15D) and disease specific (EORTC QLQ C-30 BR23) measuring tools included 51 IBR patients and 41 DR patients. These patients’ HRQoL and reconstruction methods were studied in more detail alongside with clinical data to determine HRQoL levels for patients with IBR and those with mastectomy and DR during a 24-month follow-up. Measuring points were baseline, 3, 6, 12 and 24 months.

Results

Most frequent techniques used were abdominal flaps (IBR n = 16, DR n = 14), latissimus dorsi flaps (LD) (IBR n = 19, DR n = 10), implants (IBR n = 12) and fat grafting (DR n = 6). Smaller groups were excluded from group comparisons. Approximately one third of the patients encountered complications. Symptom scores did not differ between reconstruction methods. DR patients had better overall HRQoL at 12 months, but at 24 months the situation had changed in favour of IBR. Both approaches of reconstructive surgery produced good HRQoL with no significant differences between the approaches studied.

Unilateral breast reconstruction using double transverse upper gracilis (TUG) flaps

INTRODUCTION

When the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is unavailable, autologous reconstruction of a moderate-to-large breast presents a surgical challenge. We retrospectively review our experience of unilateral breast reconstruction using double transverse upper gracilis (TUG) flaps and highlight specific technical considerations.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients underwent double TUG flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction between 2012 and 2020. The average patient age was 50 years and the average body mass index (BMI) was 23.1 kg/m². In all cases, the indication for surgery was breast cancer: 31 patients had immediate reconstruction, 11 had simultaneous axillary surgery and eight had primary contralateral symmetrising surgery.

RESULTS

Of the 68 TUG flaps, 67 (98.5%) were successful. The mean operative time was 5 h 50 min (195-460 min) and the mean combined flap weight was 551 g (279-916 g). Eight patients returned to the operating theatre in the early post-operative period and five patients underwent secondary lipofilling to address contour deformities. Most commonly (n = 22), the flaps were oriented horizontally/obliquely, with one flap anastomosed medially to the internal mammary axis and the other anastomosed lateral to the subscapular system. The internal mammary artery perforators and serratus anterior artery provided the best vessel calibre match with the TUG vessels.

CONCLUSIONS

Double TUG reconstruction is a safe and reliable option for unilateral breast reconstruction and is an important option when the DIEP flap is unavailable.

Dissatisfaction After Post-Mastectomy Breast Reconstruction: A Mixed-Methods Study

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction is associated with improved patient well-being after mastectomy; however, factors that contribute to post-surgical dissatisfaction remain poorly characterized.

METHODS

Adult women who underwent post-mastectomy implant-based or autologous breast reconstruction between 2015 and 2019 were recruited to participate in semi-structured interviews regarding their lived experiences with reconstructive care. Participants completed the BREAST-Q, and tabulated scores were used to dichotomize patient-reported outcomes as satisfied or dissatisfied (high or low) for each BREAST-Q domain. A convergent mixed-methods analysis was used to evaluate interviews for content related to satisfaction or dissatisfaction with breast reconstruction.

RESULTS

Overall, we interviewed 21 women and identified 17 subcodes that corresponded with the five BREAST-Q domains. Sources of dissatisfaction were found to be related to the following domains: (a) low breast satisfaction due to asymmetry, cup size, and lack of sensation and physical feeling (n = 8, 38%); (b) poor sexual well-being due to shape, look and feel (n = 7, 78% [of 9 who discussed sexual well-being]); (c) reduced physical well-being of the chest due to persistent pain and weakness (n = 11, 52%); (d) reduced abdominal well-being due to changes in abdominal strength, numbness, and posture (n = 6, 38% [of 16 who underwent abdominally based reconstruction]); and (e) low psychosocial well-being impacted by an unexpected appearance that negatively influenced self-confidence and self-identity (n = 13, 62%).

CONCLUSION

Patients may be unprepared for the physical, sexual, and psychosocial outcomes of breast reconstruction. Targeted strategies to improve preoperative education and shared decision making are needed to mitigate unexpectedness associated with breast reconstruction and related outcomes.

Higher body mass index is a more important risk factor than sarcopenia for complications in deep inferior epigastric perforator reconstruction

BACKGROUND

In recent years, breast reconstruction using autologous tissue after breast cancer surgery has become a common procedure. This study investigated the association between the occurrence of complications in breast reconstruction using deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps and patient risk factors among Asian women.

METHODS

This study included cases of breast reconstruction using DIEP flaps performed at our institution. We retrospectively investigated the relationship between preoperative and operative patient factors and postoperative complications by collecting data from medical records. Sarcopenia was also evaluated by calculating psoas muscle index from the area of the iliopsoas muscle at the level of the third lumbar vertebra using images from preoperative computed tomography. Postoperative complications were compared between a low-body mass index (BMI) group and a high-BMI group, defined using BMI values of <25 kg/m² and ≥25 kg/m², respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 129 cases of breast reconstruction using DIEP flaps were included in this analysis. The frequency of postoperative complications was significantly higher in the high-BMI group, including for skin flap necrosis of the breast (p = 0.03), recipient-site infection (p = 0.03), and donor-site seroma (p = 0.003). Moreover, abdominal circumference correlated significantly with recipient-site infection (p = 0.01) and donor-site seroma (p = 0.002). Sarcopenia did not show significant correlations with any complications.

CONCLUSION

BMI was identified as a risk factor for the occurrence of postoperative complications in breast reconstruction using the DIEP flap, but sarcopenia was not.

Optimal reconstructive strategies in the setting of post-mastectomy radiotherapy - A systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A third of breast cancer patients require mastectomy. In some high-risk cases postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is indicated, threatening reconstructive complications. Several PMRT and reconstruction combinations are used. Autologous flap (AF) reconstruction may be immediate (AF→PMRT), delayed-immediate with tissue expander (TE [TE→PMRT→AF]) or delayed (PMRT→AF). Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) includes immediate TE followed by PMRT and conversion to permanent implant (PI [TE→PMRT→PI]), delayed TE insertion (PMRT→TE→PI), and prosthetic implant conversion prior to PMRT (TE→PI→PMRT).

AIM

Perform a network metanalysis (NMA) assessing optimal sequencing of PMRT and reconstructive type.

METHODS

A systematic review and NMA was performed according to PRISMA-NMA guidelines. NMA was conducted using R packages netmeta and Shiny.

RESULTS

16 studies from 4182 identified, involving 2322 reconstructions over three decades, met predefined inclusion criteria. Studies demonstrated moderate heterogeneity. Multiple comparisons combining direct and indirect evidence established AF-PMRT as the optimal approach to avoid reconstructive failure, compared with IBBR strategies (versus PMRT→TE→PI; OR [odds ratio] 0.10, CrI [95% credible interval] 0.02 to 0.55; versus TE→PMRT→PI; OR 0.13, CrI 0.02 to 0.75; versus TE→PI→PMRT OR 0.24, CrI 0.05 to 1.05). PMRT→AF best avoided infection, demonstrating significant improvement versus PMRT→TE→PI alone (OR 0.12, CrI 0.02 to 0.88). Subgroup analysis of IBBR found TE→PI→PMRT reduced failure rates (OR 0.35, CrI 0.15-0.81) compared to other IBBR strategies but increased capsular contracture.

CONCLUSION

Immediate AF reconstruction is associated with reduced failure in the setting of PMRT. However, optimal reconstructive strategy depends on patient, surgeon and institutional factors. If IBBR is chosen, complication rates decrease if performed prior to PMRT.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION

CRD 42020157077.

Staged Approach to Autologous Reconstruction in the Ptotic Breast: A Comparative Study

BACKGROUND

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and autologous breast reconstruction are associated with higher patient satisfaction, quality of life, and aesthetic outcome. For patients with naturally ptotic breasts, this ideal reconstructive treatment of NSM and autologous breast reconstruction poses a challenge. We describe our experience in treating patients with ptotic natural breasts using a 2-staged approach: oncoplastic breast reduction in the first stage followed by nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate autologous reconstruction in a second stage.

METHODS

We reviewed cases of patients with grade III ptosis who underwent a staged reconstruction approach with reduction mammaplasty followed by NSM and immediate reconstruction with an abdominally based free flap (2014-2019). We compared this group of patients to a second group who underwent staging with a technique of nipple-areola complex (NAC) devascularization. A survey was administered to assess for patient satisfaction and aesthetic outcome 1 year after the second stage procedure.

RESULTS

Eight patients were identified in our reduction group, and 9 patients were identified in our devascularization group. No cases of total NAC necrosis were noted in either group (0%). Two cases of partial NAC necrosis were noted in the devascularization group (11%), whereas none were observed in the reduction group. All patients were satisfied with final outcome (100%, P = 1.0). Aesthetic scores across all factors were higher in the reduction group. Scores for overall outcome (4.6 vs 3.7, P = 0.04), natural appearance (4.8 vs 3.8, P = 0.01), breast contour (4.8 vs 3.2, P = 0.002), and position of breasts (5.0 vs 3.9, P = 0.03) were significantly higher in the reduction group.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast ptosis no longer represents a contraindication for patients desiring nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate autologous reconstruction. This series supports the use of a 2-staged approach with reduction mammaplasty in patients with naturally ptotic breasts. A staged reduction approach may offer fewer NAC complications while also allowing for superior aesthetic outcomes.

A propensity score-matched comparison of recurrence outcomes after immediate implant vs autologous flap reconstruction in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer

PURPOSE

We compared oncologic outcomes between breast cancer patients who underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) and those who underwent autologous flap reconstruction (AFR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT).

METHODS

The study group comprised 536 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent NACT followed by immediate IBBR or AFR. After propensity score matching, 138 patients in the IBBR group and 276 patients in the AFR group were selected for comparisons of locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS).

RESULTS

No significant differences were observed between the matched groups in locoregional recurrence rates (IBBR vs. AFR: 12.3% vs. 12%; P = 0.915) and distant metastasis (13% vs. 17%; P = 0.293). There was also no significant difference between the groups in LRRFS (P = 0.956), DFS (P = 0.606), DMFS (P = 0.283), or BCSS (P = 0.121). The 5- and 10-year LRRFS rates were 87.6% and 85.9% in the IBBR group, and 87.7% and 86.1% in the AFR group; the 5- and 10-year DFS rates were 79% and 77.5% in the IBBR group, and 77% and 75% in the AFR group; the 5- and 10-year DMFS rates were 85.9% and 85.9% in the IBBR group, and 83.2% and 81.8% in the AFR group; and the 5- and 10-year BCSS rates were 97.8% and 91.3% in the IBBR group, and 91.8% and 86% in the AFR group, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In this propensity score-matched analysis of oncologic outcomes in breast cancer patients who underwent immediate reconstruction after NACT, no significant differences were observed between the IBBR and AFR groups.

The Impact of Prior Abdominal Surgery on Complications of Abdominally Based Autologous Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

 Approximately half of all patients presenting for autologous breast reconstruction have abdominal scars from prior surgery, the presence of which is considered by some a relative contraindication for abdominally based reconstruction. This meta-analysis examines the impact of prior abdominal surgery on the complication profile of breast reconstruction with abdominally based free tissue transfer.

METHODS

 Literature search was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Included studies examined patients with a history of prior abdominal surgery who then underwent abdominally based free flap breast reconstruction. Prior liposuction patients and those with atypical flap designs were excluded. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess study quality. Flap complications included total and partial flap loss, fat necrosis, infection, and reoperation. Donor-site complications included delayed wound healing, infection, seroma, hematoma, and abdominal wall morbidity (hernia, bulge, laxity). Relative risk and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) between groups were calculated. Forest plots, I ² statistic heterogeneity assessments, and publication bias funnel plots were produced. Publication bias was corrected with a trim-and-fill protocol. Overall effects were assessed by fixed-effects and random-effects models.

RESULTS

 After inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, 16 articles were included for final review. These included 14 cohort and 2 case-control studies, with 1,656 (46.3%) patients and 2,236 (48.5%) flaps having undergone prior surgery. Meta-analysis showed patients with prior abdominal surgery were significantly more likely to experience donor-site delayed wound healing with a risk ratio of 1.27 (random 95% CI [1.00; 1.61]; I ²= 4) after adjustment for publication bias. No other complications were statistically different between groups.

CONCLUSION

 In patients with a history of prior abdominal surgery, abdominally based free tissue transfer is a safe and reliable option. Abdominal scars may slightly increase the risk of delayed donor-site wound healing, which can aid the surgeon in preoperative counseling.

Setting up a new microsurgical breast service in a non-tertiary hospital: Is it safe, and do outcomes compare to centres of excellence?

AIMS

Access to autologous reconstruction continues to be limited in some areas of the United Kingdom. This is, in part, due to the perceived difficulty offering this service outside of a large tertiary centre. We present our experience setting up a new microsurgical breast reconstruction service in a district hospital and compare our results to the published outcomes of large volume centres.

METHODS

Patient data were collected prospectively from the start of the service to date (July 2018- July 2020) with the capture of demographics, management, and outcomes. The BREAST-Q tool was used preoperatively and at a minimum of 3 months.

RESULTS

The first 40 patients undergoing DIEP reconstruction were included. Of these, 70% were immediate, mean age was 49 years (27-68) and BMI was 28.1 kg/m2 (22-32.5). In all, 50% had one or more co-morbidities other than breast cancer. Median length of stay was 3 days (2-6) with 75% of patients discharged on day 2 or 3. Ten patients' stay exceeded 3 days - mostly due to social reasons. Flap loss occurred in 1 patient (2.5%). Twenty-one patients developed complications (52%) within 90 days: seven Clavien-Dindo Grade I, two Grade II and ten Grade IIIb. Fat necrosis and mastectomy flap necrosis were the most common complications. Surgical intervention was higher in those needing adjuvant therapy. Patient-reported outcomes showed post-operative improvement across all domains except abdominal physical well-being at median 11.3 months.

CONCLUSIONS

We present the shortest published length of stay for unilateral DIEP reconstructions. We are the first paper to publish patient-reported outcomes following a breast microsurgical enhanced recovery protocol. We demonstrate how a new microsurgical service, utilising an enhanced recovery protocol and careful patient selection can immediately achieve outcomes comparable to well-established centres. There is no reason why all patients should not have access to microsurgical breast reconstruction locally.