Oncological safety of autologous breast reconstruction after mastectomy for invasive breast cancer

The Total Intra Venous Anesthesia Effect Versus Volatile Anesthesia, on Stress and Pain Levels, in Patients Undergoing Breast Reconstruction in Ambulatory Surgery Center Total Intra Venous Anesthesia Protocol and Stress Response

AIM

To compare pain and stress response through cortisol and DHEA levels, implementing. Total intra venous anesthesia (TIVA) versus general anesthesia with volatile anesthetics (VOL).

DESIGN

This is a prospective randomized correlation study with consecutive measurements.

METHODS

In an ambulatory surgical center from October of 2019 to August of 2020, patients who underwent breast reconstruction with autologous fat grafting were randomized into 2 groups. Patients in the TIVA group (n = 23) received intravenous anesthesia and those in the VOL group (n = 23) received volatile anesthesia (desflurane). Demographic, anthropometric and clinical data were recorded. Arterial systolic (SP) and diastolic (DP) blood pressure, heart rate and oxygen saturation were recorded. Pain and stress levels were evaluated through salivary cortisol and DHEA levels at 4 different time points: T0) 1 hour before induction, T1) during the induction, T2) during anesthesia maintenance, and T3) in recovery phase. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS 25.0 at significant level α = .05.

FINDINGS

There were no statistically significant differences between the 2 groups regarding demographic features. Interestingly that there was a statistically significant difference in the vital sign monitoring where patients in the TIVA group reported with higher levels of SP(T2) and DP (T2), whilst DHEA (T1) levels was correlated positively with patient's age and cortisol (T1) levels and negatively with DP (T3).

CONCLUSIONS

This study supports the use of TIVA as a safe and effective option for anesthesia in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with autologous fat grafting.

Survival outcomes of autologous breast reconstruction after mastectomy: A matched case-control study

Background

Due to the lack of strong evidence-based medical evidence, the relationship between autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) after mastectomy and long-term prognosis is unclear. This study aims to explore if ABR after mastectomy is associated with the prognosis of breast cancer (BC) patients based on the data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database.

Methods

We collected data for all cases diagnosed with BC who underwent or did not undergo ABR after mastectomy from 2010-2015 in the SEER database. The primary outcome of our study was overall survival (OS) and cancer specific survival (CSS). The Propensity Score-Matched (PSM) analysis was used to eliminate the effects of non-random statistics, setting the caliper as 0.0001 to balance the baseline variables within the groups. Chi-square test, Kaplan-Meier method, univariate and multivariate cox regression analysis were used to analyze the data and subgroup analysis was performed to find the subgroups of people who might benefit from ABR.

Result

Of 27893 eligible patients, 11038 patients were matched. The cohort consisted of 5519 (50%) ABR patients and 5519 (50%) non-ABR patients after PSM. After PSM, on multivariate cox regression analysis, ABR still exerted a significant influence on the OS (hazard ratio (HR), 0.83, P< 0.05). However, no statistical difference was shown on CSS (HR, 0.93, P = 0.31). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed ABR group had better OS (P = 0.001), but similar CSS (P = 0.174) between ARB and mastectomy groups. Subgroup analysis showed that after matching, those with 50-59 years old, earlier stages of disease, without a marital partner and living in urban areas had better OS after ABR.

Conclusions

ABR after mastectomy was associated with better OS, but not affect CSS.

Breast cancer recurrence after immediate and delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision‐making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant‐based PMBR separately.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta‐analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I²‐statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects.

Results

Fifty‐five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03–0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00–0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Conclusions

Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR.

Lay summery

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial.

Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision‐making complex.

This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR.

A Single-Center Retrospective Analysis of Local and Distant Relapse of Breast Cancer Following Immediate Breast Reconstruction According to Molecular Subtypes

Purpose

Concerns have been raised about the oncologic safety of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) following mastectomy for breast cancer. This study aimed to evaluate locoregional recurrence (LRR) and distant metastasis (DM) of breast cancer according to its molecular subtype in patients who underwent mastectomy alone or IBR after mastectomy.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, consecutive breast cancer patients treated by the single senior surgeon (XZ) between February 2010 and December 2014 were eligible. In total, 389 consecutive patients were included; 295 patients underwent mastectomy alone and 94 patients underwent mastectomy with IBR. Data were retrospectively collected and analyzed for LRR and DM stratified by molecular subtypes.

Results

With a median follow-up of 73 and 87.5 months, 1.69% of patients in the mastectomy alone group developed LRR compared to 0% in the reconstruction group (p = 0.342) and the total incidence of DMs was 11.52% in patients who received mastectomy alone and 7.44% in patients who received postmastectomy IBR (p = 0.262), respectively. The cumulative incidence of LRR was 2.1% vs. 0% for luminal A, 0% vs. 0% for luminal B, 0% vs. 0% for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-enriched, and 4.5% vs. 0% for triple-negative in the mastectomy alone group compared to the postmastectomy IBR group. The cumulative incidence of DM was 15.5% vs. 5.7% for luminal A, 10% vs. 8.7% for luminal B, 17.3% vs. 0% for HER2-enriched, and 6.8% vs. 7.1% for triple-negative in the mastectomy alone group compared to the postmastectomy IBR group. On multivariable Cox regression analysis, lymph node metastasis was associated with an increased risk of DM in the mastectomy alone group (p = 0.03) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy was associated with an increased risk of DM in the postmastectomy IBR group (p = 0.021).

Conclusion

This study suggests that IBR does not have a negative impact on the LRR and DM of breast cancer according to molecular subtypes.

Breast cancer outcomes following immediate breast reconstruction with implants versus autologous flaps: a propensity score-matched study

PURPOSE

A large proportion of patients with breast cancer who had mastectomy had undergone breast reconstruction with implants or autologous flaps. However, only a few studies have compared the breast cancer outcomes between the implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and autologous flap reconstruction (AFR). In this study, we retrospectively compared the local recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and survival outcomes between immediate IBR and AFR.

METHODS

A total of 1530 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent IBR or AFR with nipple-/skin-sparing mastectomy were included. Patients who underwent neoadjuvant systemic therapy were excluded from the study. After propensity score matching by age at diagnosis, T stage, N stage, molecular subtype, mastectomy type, adjuvant radiotherapy status, and follow-up period, 938 patients were 1:1 matched, comprising the well-balanced IBR and AFR groups. Locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS), disease-free survival (DFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were compared between the matched groups.

RESULTS

After matching, the median follow-up periods were 68 months and 71 months for the IBR and AFR groups, respectively. No significant differences were observed between the IBR and AFR groups regarding the local recurrence (7.2% vs. 5.1%; P = 0.175), regional recurrence (2.1% vs. 1.5%; P = 0.463), or distant metastasis (3.2% vs. 3.2%; P = 1.000) rates. Moreover, no significant difference was observed between the IBR and AFR groups in the LRRFS (hazard ratio, 0.691; 95% CI, 0.433-1.102; P = 0.118), DFS (hazard ratio, 0.709; 95% CI, 0.468-1.076; P = 0.104), DMFS (hazard ratio, 1.006; 95% CI, 0.491-2.059; P = 0.987), or BCSS (hazard ratio, 0.445; 95% CI, 0.111-1.786; P = 0.659).

CONCLUSION

In this propensity score-matched analysis of oncologic outcomes in patients with primary breast cancer who underwent immediate breast reconstruction with nipple-/skin-sparing mastectomy, no significant differences were observed between the IBR and AFR groups.

The difference in local, regional and distant breast cancer recurrence between the immediate and delayed DIEP flap procedure; a retrospective cohort study

Purpose

It has been hypothesized that autologous breast reconstruction can cause reactivation of dormant micro metastases by its extensive tissue trauma, influencing the risk of breast cancer recurrence. However, about the specific effect of timing on breast cancer recurrence in the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap reconstruction is not much known. In this study the rate of local, regional and distant recurrence between patients undergoing an immediate and delayed autologous DIEP flap breast reconstruction were evaluated.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, breast cancer patients undergoing a DIEP flap breast reconstruction between 2010 and 2018 in three hospitals in the Netherlands were evaluated. Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed to assess the impact of different factors on breast cancer recurrence. The primary endpoint was local breast cancer recurrence. Secondary endpoints were regional and distant recurrence.

Results

A total of 919 DIEP-flap reconstructions were done in 862 women of which 347 were immediate- and 572 were delayed DIEP flap reconstructions. After a median follow-up of 46 months and 86 months respectively (p < 0.001), local breast cancer recurrence occurred in 1.5% and in 1.7% of the patients resulting in an adjusted hazard ratio of 2.890 (p = 0.001, 95% CI 1.536, 5437).

Conclusion

This study suggests an increased risk for breast cancer recurrence in women receiving a delayed DIEP flap reconstruction as compared to women receiving an immediate DIEP flap reconstruction. However, these data should be interpreted carefully as a result of selection bias.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-021-06199-3.

Development of an invasive ductal carcinoma in a contralateral composite nipple graft after an autologous breast reconstruction: a case report

BACKGROUND

Nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction is a technique used in breast reconstructive surgery, which is performed during the final stage of breast reconstruction after total mastectomy of primary breast cancer. Composite nipple grafts utilizing the contralateral NAC are common; however, to our knowledge, there are no reports of new primary invasive ductal carcinoma development within the graft. Here, we describe one such case for the first time.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 54-year-old woman was referred to us by the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery in our medical center for further evaluation of right nipple erosion. She had undergone total mastectomy of the right breast following a breast cancer diagnosis 15 years ago, at which time tumor biological profiling revealed the following: estrogen receptor (ER), positive; progesterone receptor (PgR), negative; and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), undetermined. She received adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy. She defaulted endocrine therapy for a few years, and 7 years after surgery, she underwent autologous breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap. In the following year, NAC reconstruction was performed using a composite graft technique. Seven years after the NAC reconstruction, erosion appeared on the nipple grafted from its contralateral counterpart; scrape cytology revealed malignancy. The skin on the right side of her chest around the NAC and subcutaneous fat tissue consisted of transferred tissue from the abdomen, as the DIEP flap and grafted nipple were located on the graft skin. The right nipple carcinoma arose from the tissue taken from the left nipple. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography showed no malignant findings in the left breast. As the malignant lesion seemed limited to the area around the grafted right nipple on MRI, surgical resection with sufficient lateral and deep margins was performed around the right nipple. Pathological findings revealed invasive ductal carcinoma with comedo ductal components infiltrating the graft skin and underlying adipose tissue. Immunohistochemistry revealed positive for ER, PgR, and HER2.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first case involving the development of invasive ductal carcinoma in a nipple graft constructed on the skin of a DIEP flap, with the origin from the contralateral breast's nipple.