Nipple-sparing mastectomy: A review of outcomes at a single institution

Impact of Mastectomy Flap Necrosis on Patient-Reported Quality-of-Life Measures After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Preliminary Analysis

BACKGROUND

Mastectomy skin flap necrosis (SFN) is common following nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), but studies on its quality-of-life (QOL) impact are limited. We examined patient-reported QOL and satisfaction after NSM with/without SFN utilizing the BREAST-Q patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) survey.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients undergoing NSM between April 2018 and July 2021 at our institution were examined; the BREAST-Q PROM was administered preoperatively, and at 6 months and 1 year postoperatively. SFN extent/severity was documented at 2-3 weeks postoperatively; QOL and satisfaction domains were compared between patients with/without SFN.

RESULTS

A total of 573 NSMs in 333 patients were included, and 135 breasts in 82 patients developed SFN (24% superficial, 56% partial thickness, 16% full thickness). Patients with SFN reported significantly lower scores in the satisfaction with breasts (p = 0.032) and psychosocial QOL domains (p = 0.009) at 6 months versus those without SFN, with scores returning to baseline at 1 year in both domains. In the "physical well-being-of-the-chest" domain, there was an overall decline in scores among all patients; however, there were no significant differences at any time point between patients with or without SFN. Sexual well-being scores declined for patients with SFN compared with those without at 6 months and also at 1 year, but this did not reach significance (p = 0.13, p = 0.2, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients undergoing NSM who developed SFN reported significantly lower satisfaction and psychosocial well-being scores at 6 months, which returned to baseline by 1 year. Physical well-being of the chest significantly declines after NSM regardless of SFN. Future studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up are needed to determine SFN's impact on long-term QOL.

Comparison of Clinical Breast Exam to Breast MRI Surveillance in Patients Following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly being performed for patients with breast cancer. However, optimal postoperative surveillance has not been defined.

METHODS

A prospectively maintained database identified patients with in-situ and invasive cancer who underwent NSM between 2007-2021. Clinical data on postoperative breast surveillance and interventions were collected. Patients who had MRI surveillance versus clinical breast exam (CBE) alone were compared with respect to tumor characteristics, recurrence, and survival.

RESULTS

A total of 483 NSMs were performed on 399 patients. 255 (63.9%) patients had invasive ductal carcinoma, 31 (7.8%) invasive lobular carcinoma, 92 (23.1%) DCIS, 6 (1.5%) mixed ductal and lobular carcinoma, 9 (2.3%) others, and 6 (1.5%) unknown. Postoperatively, 265 (66.4%) patients were followed with CBE alone and 134 (33.6%) had surveillance MRIs. At a median follow-up of 33 months, 20 patients (5.0%) developed in-breast recurrence, 6 patients had (1.5%) an axillary recurrence, and 28 with (7.0%) distant recurrence. 14 (53.8%) LRR were detected in the CBE group and 12 (46.2%) were detected in the MRI group (P = .16). Overall survival (OS) was 99%, with no difference in OS between patients who had CBE alone versus MRI (P = .46). MRI was associated with higher biopsy rates compared to CBE alone (15.8% vs. 7.8%, P = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to CBE alone, the use of screening MRI following NSM results in higher rate of biopsy and no difference in overall survival.

Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer in BRCA Gene Mutation Carriers: Outcomes at 70 Months Median Follow-Up

BACKGROUND

Retention of the nipple-areola complex with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) techniques provides a more natural cosmetic result than procedures that sacrifice the nipple. While the oncologic safety of NSM is established by several studies, there is little long-term data on outcomes in BRCA mutation carriers with breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who underwent NSM and immediate reconstruction from 2008 to 2019 were reviewed and patients with breast cancer on biopsy or final pathology were included. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics, as well as treatment, recurrence, and survival data were collected.

RESULTS

A total of 114 therapeutic NSM were performed in 105 BRCA mutation carriers (56 BRCA1, 47 BRCA2, and two women with both mutations). Median age was 45 years. Cancers were 18% stage 0, 52% stage I, 27% stage II, and 3% stage III. Mean invasive tumor size was 1.6 cm and 33 (35%) invasive tumors were triple negative. There were five (4.4%) positive nipple margins on final pathology; all underwent nipple excision. Most patients (80, 76%) received systemic therapy: 65 (62%) received chemotherapy and 48 (46%) received endocrine therapy. At 70 months median follow-up (range 15-150 months), no patient had developed a recurrence in the retained nipple-areola complex or at the site of a nipple excised for a positive margin. The rate of locoregional recurrence outside the nipple was 2.6%, and the rate of distant recurrence was 3.8%. Overall survival was 96%.

CONCLUSIONS

NSM is a safe option for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers who undergo mastectomy for breast cancer.

Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: What the Radiologist Should Know

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly offered to patients undergoing treatment of breast cancer and prophylaxis treatment for reduction of breast cancer risk. NSM is considered oncologically safe for appropriately selected patients and is associated with improved cosmetic outcomes and quality of life. Accepted indications for NSM have expanded in recent years, and currently only inflammatory breast cancer or malignancy involving the nipple is considered an absolute contraindication. Neoplasms close to and involving the nipple areolar complex are common, and cancer of the lactiferous ducts can spread to the nipple. Therefore, accurate determination of nipple involvement at imaging examinations is critical to identifying appropriate candidates for NSM and preventing local recurrence. Multiple imaging features have been described as predictors of nipple involvement, with tumor to nipple distance, enhancement between the index malignancy and the nipple, and nipple retraction demonstrating the highest predictive values. These features can be assessed at multimodality breast imaging, particularly at breast MRI, which demonstrates high specificity and negative predictive value for determining nipple involvement in malignancy. Online supplemental material is available for this article. ^©RSNA, 2022.

Two-Stage Versus One-Stage Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Timing of Surgery Prevents Nipple Loss

BACKGROUND

Devascularization of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) before nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) enhances blood flow to the skin. This study analyzed the effect of the interval between stages in two-stage (2S) operations and compared the ischemic events with those of one-stage (1S) NSM.

METHODS

Ischemic complications were defined as partial/reversible (PR) or full-thickness/irreversible (FI) skin necrosis of the NAC or flap. The latter encompassed limited areas of the NAC, resulting in loss of nipple height or areolar circumference without affecting the integrity or appearance of the NAC. Outcomes between the two groups were compared using chi-square and both uni- and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

From 2015 to 2019, 109 breasts underwent 2S NSM and 103 breasts underwent 1S NSM. Grade 2 or 3 breast ptosis was more common in the 2S group than in the 1S group (60.5% vs 30.5%; p < 0.01). The median time between devascularization and NSM was 30 days (range, 11-415 days). After devascularization, ischemic events occurred in 25.7% of the breasts. Nipple loss occurred in 7.8% of the 1S group and 0% of the 2S group. Both PR and FI NAC ischemic events were observed in 66.7% of the breasts when NSM took place fewer than 20 days (n = 9) after devascularization versus 15% when NSM took place 20 days or longer afterward (n = 100). Overall, NAC, flap ischemic complications, or both occurred in 35.9% of the 1S group versus 20.2% of the 2S group (p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, the odds ratio of ischemic complications in the 2S versus the 1S group was 0.38 (range, 0.19-0.75).

CONCLUSIONS

Fewer ischemic complications and no nipple loss occurred in 2S NSM. Ischemic events are fewer when the interval between devascularization and NSM is 20 days or longer.