Autologous Fat Grafting and the Occurrence of Radiation-Induced Capsular Contracture

National trends in revision procedures in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction: Autologous vs implant-based approaches

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction involves collaborative decision-making between patients and surgeons, but the need for multiple revisions after the initial reconstructive surgery process can burden patients and the healthcare system. This study explored how the type of breast reconstruction (autologous [ABR], immediate implant-based reconstruction [IBR], or two-stage IBR) impacts postreconstruction revision rates.

METHOD

Using MarketScan Databases, a retrospective database study (2007-2021) was conducted, identifying revision procedures through Current Procedural Terminology codes. Statistical analysis with linear models, adjusted for patient characteristics and surgical factors, used a significance threshold of p < 0.05.

RESULTS

Among 58,264 patients, 6.2% of ABR patients, 3.8% of immediate IBR patients, and 3.6% of two-stage IBR patients underwent future revisions. IBR had a 51% lower incidence rate of revision operations than ABR (incidence rate ratio = 0.49, p < 0.001). Within IBR, there was no significant difference in the number of operations between immediate IBR (0.06 ± 0.32) and two-stage IBR (0.05 ± 0.32, p = 0.95). Immediate IBR demonstrated 12% (OR = 0.88, p = 0.0022) and 70% (OR = 0.30, p < 0.001) lower odds of requiring breast revision and fat grafting compared to ABR, respectively. Two-stage reconstruction had 66 % lower odds of requiring only fat grafting than ABR (OR = 0.34, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

ABR necessitated a higher number of total revision procedures after completion of the initial reconstruction. These findings will better equip providers and patients to counsel patients in understanding their reconstructive journey, planning their reconstructions and timing, and provide more accurate estimates of the number of procedures that will be required to reach their aesthetic goals and final outcome.

Simultaneous Fat Grafting During Tissue Expander-to-Implant Exchange: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common technique for breast reconstruction. The primary resource for correcting deformities, once patients have achieved an adequate volume with two-stage IBBR, is autologous fat grafting. We compared the surgical outcomes of simultaneous fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange (SFG + TtIE) versus no fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange (No-FGX).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of all consecutive patients undergoing two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with TE from January 2011 to December 2020. Propensity score matching was implemented to optimize comparability. The control group did not receive fat grafting at the time of TE-to-implant exchange.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 196 reconstructions were evaluated, 98 in each group. Reconstructions in the SFG + TtIE received larger implants during exchange in comparison with the No-FGX group (539 ± 135.1-cc versus 495.97 ± 148-cc, p=0.035). The mean volume of fat lipoinjected during TE-to-implant exchange in the SFG + TtIE group was 88.79 ± 41-ml. A higher proportion of reconstructions in the SFG + TtIE group underwent additional fat grafting after exchange versus the No-FGX group (19% versus 9%, p = 0.041). After propensity score matching, only the rate of fat necrosis after exchange was significantly higher in the SFG + TtIE group (10% versus 2%, p = 0.017). The rate of breast cancer recurrence (3% versus 5%, p = 1.00) was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

SFG + TtIE is a safe procedure to improve the envelope of reconstructed breasts during two-stage IBBR. SFG + TtIE does not increase the rate of periprosthetic infection or wound-related complication versus no fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange, but increases the rate of fat necrosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Therapeutic study. 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.

An Evaluation of Native Breast Dimension and Tissue Expander Inflation Rate on the Risk of Capsular Contracture Development in Postmastectomy Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Capsular contracture is a common complication after 2-stage breast reconstruction. The relationships between native breast size, the rate of tissue expander expansion, and capsule formation have not been elucidated. This study aims to evaluate how these factors contribute to capsular contracture and establish cutoff values for increased risk.

METHODS

A data set consisting of 229 patients who underwent 2-stage breast reconstruction between 2012 and 2021 was included in the study. The rate of expansion is estimated as the final expanded volume subtracted by the initial filling volume of the tissue expander over time elapsed. The native breast size was estimated using various preoperative breast measurements and the weight of mastectomy specimen (grams). Further stratified analysis evaluated patients separately based on postoperative radiation status.

RESULTS

Greater nipple-inframammary fold distance and faster tissue expander enlargement rate conferred decreased odds of developing capsular contracture ( P < 0.05). On stratified analysis, faster tissue expansion rate was not significant in the nonradiated cohort but remained a significant negative predictor in the radiation group (odds ratio, 0.996; P < 0.05). Cut-point analysis showed an expansion rate of <240 mL/mo and a nipple-inframammary fold value of <10.5 cm as conferring a greater risk of capsular contracture.

CONCLUSION

Smaller inframammary fold distance may be associated with a higher risk of capsular contracture. Slower expansion rates correlate with increased odds of contracture in patients undergoing adjuvant radiation. Breast geometry should be considered when risk stratifying various reconstruction approaches (implant vs autologous). In addition, longer delays between implant exchange and initial tissue expansion should be avoided if clinically feasible.

Oncological Safety of Autologous Fat Grafting in Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-analysis Based on Matched Cohort Studies

BACKGROUND

Autologous fat grafting has become a commonly used procedure for breast reconstruction after breast cancer surgical treatment. Nevertheless, oncological considerations remain concerning autologous fat grafting after breast cancer surgery.

OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to summarize the current matched cohort studies and provide high-quality evidence-based conclusions on the oncological safety of fat grafting in breast reconstruction.

METHODS

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines were followed. A literature search was performed on August 1, 2021, using PubMed. All relevant matched cohort studies of patients undergoing autologous fat grafting after breast cancer surgery were included. After independently screening the studies and extracting the data, pooled estimates for local and regional recurrence as well as distant metastases were conducted using Review Manager software (RevMan, version 5.3). Outcomes were expressed as odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies involving 7494 patients were included. The observed outcomes indicated that no significant differences existed in the risks of local and regional recurrence or distant metastases between autologous fat grafting and control groups. Also, there was no significant heterogeneity among the studies.

CONCLUSION

This study provided evidence-based conclusions that support the use of autologous fat grafting in breast reconstruction.

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 .

Radiation-Induced Tissue Damage: Clinical Consequences and Current Treatment Options

Radiation therapy is a valuable tool in the treatment of numerous malignancies but, in certain cases, can also causes significant acute and chronic damage to noncancerous neighboring tissues. This review focuses on the pathophysiology of radiation-induced damage and the clinical implications it has for plastic surgeons across breast reconstruction, osteoradionecrosis, radiation-induced skin cancers, and wound healing. The current understanding of treatment modalities presented here include hyperbaric oxygen therapy, autologous fat grafting and stem cells, and pharmaceutical agents.