1
|
Liu J, Chen C, Chen H, Xiang A, Zheng R, Hu S, Guo J, Qu L, Zhou J, Wu J. Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complication Profiles of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction in Patients With Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy. Ann Plast Surg 2024; 93:22-29. [PMID: 38885161 DOI: 10.1097/sap.0000000000003974] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 06/20/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This study aims to investigate the patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complications of distinct implant-based breast reconstruction modality for patients with postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). METHODS A retrospective review was conducted on breast cancer patients with stage II-III disease who performed implant-based breast reconstruction following with PMRT between September 2016 and April 2022. The patients were categorized into two matched groups: (1) patients receiving prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) or (2) subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) followed by PMRT. Following reconstruction, the patients were further compared for PMRT with the tissue expander (PMRT-TE) versus PMRT with permanent implant (PMRT-PI). PROs were measured with BREAST-Q questionnaire. Early and late complications were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS A total of 55 eligible patients were recruited. Patients who underwent PBR reported significantly higher satisfaction with breasts scores (P = 0.003) compared with the SBR group. The PMRT-TE group had higher satisfaction with breasts (P = 0.001) but lower physical well-being (P = 0.029) scores compared with PMRT-PI group. Moreover, patients in SBR cohort had a higher risk of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) (20.5% vs 6.3%) and implant dislocation (48.7% vs 12.5%) than patients in PBR cohort. Patients in PMRT-PI group had a slightly higher rate of capsular contracture (Baker grade III or IV) than PMRT-TE group (20.8% vs 12.9%). CONCLUSIONS PBR was associated with lower rates of late complications, especially for implant dislocation, and higher satisfaction with breasts scores compared to SBR. In addition, compared to PMRT-TE with PMRT-PI, patients in PMRT-TE cohort reported superior PROs of satisfaction with breasts.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jian Liu
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Cong Chen
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Honggang Chen
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Aizhai Xiang
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Ruzhen Zheng
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Shufang Hu
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Jufeng Guo
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Li Qu
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Jun Zhou
- From the Department of Breast Surgery, Affiliated Hangzhou First People's Hospital, School of Medicine, Westlake University, Hangzhou
| | - Jiong Wu
- Department of Breast Surgery, Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center, Shanghai, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Shah V, Soh CL, Chhatwal K, Kucharczak J, Airapetyan AA, Avavde D, Torabi S, Mackenzie A, Miller G, Vardanyan R, Arjomandi Rad A, Malawana J. Autologous breast reconstruction in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs): a systematic review of current practices and challenges. Minerva Surg 2024; 79:73-81. [PMID: 38381032 DOI: 10.23736/s2724-5691.23.10111-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/22/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Efforts to improve global healthcare persist, yet LMICs face challenges accessing surgical care, especially breast reconstruction amidst rising breast cancer cases. This review evaluates the present state and challenges of autologous breast reconstruction in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). EVIDENCE ACQUISITION Utilizing the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Collaboration's standards, databases such as EMBASE, MEDLINE, Cochrane, PubMed, and Google Scholar were examined for studies on breast reconstruction in LMICs (based on the World Bank's 2022-2023 definitions) up to August 2022. Articles and case reports focusing on autologous reconstruction following breast cancer surgery in these regions were incorporated. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS From an initial 288 articles, 19 met the criteria after thorough assessment. These articles documented 4899 patient cases from LMICs, with the breakdown being: 11 on LD flaps, nine on TRAM flaps, eight on DIEP flaps, two on TDAP flaps, and one on TMG flap. Flap necrosis emerged as the prevalent complication in four studies. CONCLUSIONS While autologous breast reconstruction presents superior aesthetic benefits without notable long-term economic setbacks, its adoption in LMICs is limited. This is partly due to the domination of implant-based methods among patients and surgeons, selected due to convenience. The scarcity of concrete evidence and standardized metrics in LMICs clouds the understanding of this procedure. Despite its advantages, awareness is low, necessitating more training and awareness campaigns. Uniform reporting, quality data, and financial analysis can provide a comprehensive LMIC understanding, aiding future research.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Viraj Shah
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | - Chien L Soh
- School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Karanjot Chhatwal
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK
| | | | - Arkady A Airapetyan
- Department of Research and Academia, National Institute of Health, Yerevan, Armenia
| | - Dani Avavde
- Department of Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham, UK
| | - Saeed Torabi
- Department of Anesthesia, University Hospital Cologne, Cologne, Germany
| | - Alexandra Mackenzie
- Department of Emergency Surgery, Chelsea and Westminster Hospital NHS Trust, London, UK
| | - George Miller
- Research Unit, The Healthcare Leadership Academy, London, UK
- Center for Digital Health and Education Research (CoDHER), University of Central Lancashire Medical School, Preston, UK
| | - Robert Vardanyan
- Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Imperial College London, London, UK -
| | - Arian Arjomandi Rad
- Research Unit, The Healthcare Leadership Academy, London, UK
- Center for Digital Health and Education Research (CoDHER), University of Central Lancashire Medical School, Preston, UK
- Clinical Academic Graduate School, The University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| | - Johann Malawana
- Research Unit, The Healthcare Leadership Academy, London, UK
- Center for Digital Health and Education Research (CoDHER), University of Central Lancashire Medical School, Preston, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Xie J, Yan W, Zhu Z, Wang M, Shi J. Advances in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction. Ther Clin Risk Manag 2023; 19:361-368. [PMID: 37095832 PMCID: PMC10122485 DOI: 10.2147/tcrm.s404799] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/14/2023] [Accepted: 04/01/2023] [Indexed: 04/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Breast reconstruction can be divided into prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) and subpectoral breast reconstruction (SPBR) according to the implant plane. The original prepectoral breast reconstruction was abandoned for a long time due to the frequent and severe complications. Now, advances in materials technology and improved methods of mastectomy have made safe prepectoral breast reconstruction possible. Moreover, a number of studies have gradually demonstrated the advantages of prepectoral breast reconstruction. As prepectoral breast reconstruction becomes more and more attractive, it is time to review the current advances in prepectoral breast reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jiaheng Xie
- Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Wei Yan
- Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Zhechen Zhu
- Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Ming Wang
- Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
| | - Jingping Shi
- Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, People’s Republic of China
- Correspondence: Jingping Shi; Ming Wang, Department of Burn and Plastic Surgery, The First Hospital Affiliated to Nanjing Medical University, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210029, People’s Republic of China, Tel +8613082555422, Email ;
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Emanuele Lisa AV, Salgarello M, Huscher A, Corsi F, Piovani D, Rubbino F, Andreoletti S, Papa G, Klinger F, Tinterri C, Testori A, Scorsetti M, Veronesi P, Leonardi MC, Rietjens M, Cortinovis U, Summo V, Rampino Cordaro E, Parodi PC, Persichetti P, Barone M, De Santis G, Murolo M, Riccio M, Aquinati A, Cavaliere F, Vaia N, Pagura G, Dalla Venezia E, Bassetto F, Vindigni V, Ciuffreda L, Bocchiotti MA, Sciarillo A, Renzi N, Meneghini G, Kraljic T, Loreti A, Fortunato L, Pino V, Vinci V, Klinger M. The Effect of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on One- and Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction and on Autologous Reconstruction: A Multicenter Italian Study among 18 Senonetwork Breast Centres. Breast J 2023; 2023:6688466. [PMID: 37205012 PMCID: PMC10188256 DOI: 10.1155/2023/6688466] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/25/2022] [Revised: 04/07/2023] [Accepted: 04/15/2023] [Indexed: 05/21/2023]
Abstract
Purpose In modern breast cancer treatment, a growing role has been observed for breast reconstruction together with an increase in clinical indications for postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Choosing the optimum type of reconstructive technique is a clinical challenge. We therefore conducted a national multicenter study to analyze the impact of PMRT on breast reconstruction. Methods We conducted a retrospective case-control multicenter study on women undergoing breast reconstruction. Data were collected from 18 Italian Breast Centres and stored in a cumulative database which included the following: autologous reconstruction, direct-to-implant (DTI), and tissue expander/immediate (TE/I). For all patients, we described complications and surgical endpoints to complications such as reconstruction failure, explant, change in type of reconstruction, and reintervention. Results From 2001 to April 2020, 3116 patients were evaluated. The risk for any complication was significantly increased in patients receiving PMRT (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.33-2.24; p < 0.001). PMRT was associated with a significant increase in the risk of capsular contracture in the DTI and TE/I groups (aOR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.57-3.20; p < 0.001). Comparing type of procedures, the risk of failure (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.06-3.12, p=0.030), explant (aOR, 3.34; 95% CI, 3.85-7.83, p < 0.001), and severe complications (aOR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.88-3.43, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the group undergoing DTI reconstruction as compared to TE/I reconstruction. Conclusion Our study confirms that autologous reconstruction is the procedure least impacted by PMRT, while DTI appears to be the most impacted by PMRT, when compared with TE/I which shows a lower rate of explant and reconstruction failure. The trial is registered with NCT04783818, and the date of registration is 1 March, 2021, retrospectively registered.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Andrea Vittorio Emanuele Lisa
- Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgery School, Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine BIOMETRA-Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Milan, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marzia Salgarello
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Director of the Residency Program of Plastic Surgery, IRCCS Policlinico Gemelli, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Alessandra Huscher
- Department of Radiotherapy, Fondazione Poliambulanza “Guido Berlucchi” Hospital, Brescia, Italy
| | - Fabio Corsi
- Breast Unit, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Istituti Clinici Maugeri, Pavia, Italy
- Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | - Daniele Piovani
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, IRCCS Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Federica Rubbino
- Laboratory of Molecular Gastroenterology, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Stefania Andreoletti
- Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgery School, Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine BIOMETRA-Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Milan, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Giovanni Papa
- Department of Plastic Surgery, UCO, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | | | - Corrado Tinterri
- Breast Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Alberto Testori
- Breast Unit, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marta Scorsetti
- Radiotherapy and Radiosurgery Department, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Veronesi
- Division of Senology, Department of Oncology and Oncohematology, IEO, IRCCS European Institute of Oncology, University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Mario Rietjens
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, IEO, IRCCS European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy
| | - Umberto Cortinovis
- Department of Plastic Reconstructive Surgery, IRCCS National Cancer Institute, Milan, Italy
| | - Valeria Summo
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy
| | - Emanuele Rampino Cordaro
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Azienda Sanitaria Universitaria Friuli Centrale (ASUFC), Santa Maria della Misericordia Hospital, Udine, Italy
| | | | | | - Mauro Barone
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Policlinico di Modena, University of Modena and Reggio, Modena, Italy
| | - Giorgio De Santis
- Department of Plastic Surgery, Policlinico di Modena, University of Modena and Reggio, Modena, Italy
| | - Matteo Murolo
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria-Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Michele Riccio
- Department of Reconstructive Surgery and Hand Surgery, Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria-Ospedali Riuniti, Ancona, Italy
| | - Angelica Aquinati
- Department of Breast Surgery and Integrated Senology Centre, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo, Italy
| | - Francesco Cavaliere
- Department of Breast Surgery and Integrated Senology Centre, Belcolle Hospital, Viterbo, Italy
| | - Nicola Vaia
- Department of Breast Surgery, AULSS 3 Veneziana, Venice, Italy
| | - Giulia Pagura
- Department of Breast Surgery, AULSS 3 Veneziana, Venice, Italy
| | - Erica Dalla Venezia
- Unit of Plastic Surgery, Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
| | - Franco Bassetto
- Unit of Plastic Surgery, Department of Neurosciences, University of Padova, Padova, Italy
| | - Vincenzo Vindigni
- Department of Breast Surgery and Breast Unit, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy
| | - Luigi Ciuffreda
- Department of Breast Surgery and Breast Unit, Casa Sollievo della Sofferenza Hospital, San Giovanni Rotondo, Foggia, Italy
| | | | - Alberto Sciarillo
- Department of Plastic Surgery, ASUGI Cattinara Hospital, Trieste, Italy
| | - Nadia Renzi
- Department of Plastic Surgery, ASUGI Cattinara Hospital, Trieste, Italy
| | - Graziano Meneghini
- Functional Department Transmural Breast Surgery, AULSS 8 Berica, Vicenza, Italy
| | - Tajna Kraljic
- Department of Breast Surgery, AULSS 8 Berica, Vicenza, Italy
| | - Andrea Loreti
- Department of Plastic Surgery, San Giovanni Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Lucio Fortunato
- Department of Breast Surgery and Breast Unit, San Giovanni Addolorata Hospital, Rome, Italy
| | - Valentina Pino
- Istituto di Clinica Chirurgica, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Valeriano Vinci
- Department of Biomedical Sciences, IRCCS Humanitas University, Pieve Emanuele, Milan, Italy
- IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| | - Marco Klinger
- Reconstructive and Aesthetic Plastic Surgery School, Department of Medical Biotechnology and Translational Medicine BIOMETRA-Plastic Surgery Unit, University of Milan, IRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Broyles JM, Balk EM, Adam GP, Cao W, Bhuma MR, Mehta S, Dominici LS, Pusic AL, Saldanha IJ. Implant-based versus Autologous Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN 2022; 10:e4180. [PMID: 35291333 PMCID: PMC8916208 DOI: 10.1097/gox.0000000000004180] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/23/2021] [Accepted: 01/13/2022] [Indexed: 01/29/2023]
Abstract
For women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy, the comparative benefits and harms of implant-based reconstruction (IBR) and autologous reconstruction (AR) are not well known. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of IBR versus AR after mastectomy for breast cancer. Methods We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies from inception to March 23, 2021. We assessed the risk of bias of individual studies and strength of evidence (SoE) of our findings using standard methods. Results We screened 15,936 citations and included 40 studies (two randomized controlled trials and 38 adjusted nonrandomized comparative studies). Compared with patients who undergo IBR, those who undergo AR experience clinically significant better sexual well-being [summary adjusted mean difference (adjMD) 5.8, 95% CI 3.4-8.2; three studies] and satisfaction with breasts (summary adjMD 8.1, 95% CI 6.1-10.1; three studies) (moderate SoE for both outcomes). AR was associated with a greater risk of venous thromboembolism (moderate SoE), but IBR was associated with a greater risk of reconstructive failure (moderate SoE) and seroma (low SoE) in long-term follow-up (1.5-4 years). Other outcomes were comparable between groups, or the evidence was insufficient to merit conclusions. Conclusions Most evidence regarding IBR versus AR is of low or moderate SoE. AR is probably associated with better sexual well-being and satisfaction with breasts and lower risks of seroma and long-term reconstructive failure but a higher risk of thromboembolic events. New high-quality research is needed to address the important research gaps.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Justin M. Broyles
- From the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass
| | - Ethan M. Balk
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| | - Gaelen P. Adam
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| | - Wangnan Cao
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| | - Monika Reddy Bhuma
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| | - Shivani Mehta
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| | - Laura S. Dominici
- Department of Surgery, Division of Breast Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass
| | - Andrea L. Pusic
- From the Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Mass
| | - Ian J. Saldanha
- Center for Evidence Synthesis in Health, Department of Health Services, Policy, and Practice, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
- Department of Epidemiology, Brown University School of Public Health, Providence, R.I
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
The Impact of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Surgical and Satisfaction Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN 2021; 9:e3910. [PMID: 34765389 PMCID: PMC8575424 DOI: 10.1097/gox.0000000000003910] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/10/2021] [Accepted: 09/10/2021] [Indexed: 12/31/2022]
Abstract
Adjuvant radiotherapy could be a necessary step in the oncological treatment for breast cancer. However, radiotherapy may have negative effects on implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to determine the impact of adjuvant radiation therapy on surgical results and patient-reported satisfaction outcomes in women undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction. Methods A systematic search in PubMed was conducted on September 2019 and updated on April 2021. The risk of bias of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Observational Studies. RevMan 5 was used for statistical analysis. We obtained relative risks to determine the complication incidence and mean differences for 2-year BREAST-Q scores. Results Fourteen studies were included. A total of 11,958 implant-based immediate reconstructions were performed, 2311 received postmastectomy radiation therapy, and 9647 were considered as control group. Surgical complications, reoperation rates, and reconstruction failure were significantly higher among irradiated breasts. Significantly lower BREAST-Q scores were reported by irradiated women receiving radiotherapy. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis combines reconstruction complication rates with aesthetic and patient-reported satisfaction outcomes. Adjuvant radiotherapy is consistently associated with greater complication rates and poorer aesthetic and satisfaction outcomes. The magnitude of association is significantly lower when the reconstruction is based on autologous tissues.
Collapse
|
7
|
Ali B, Choi EHE, Barlas V, Menon NG, Morrell NT. Unplanned reoperations after microsurgical breast reconstruction: Findings from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program. Microsurgery 2021; 42:135-142. [PMID: 34658057 DOI: 10.1002/micr.30820] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/12/2020] [Revised: 05/18/2021] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 11/09/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND While microsurgical breast reconstruction may require multiple planned operations, unplanned reoperations has not been studied. We sought to investigate unplanned reoperations after microsurgical breast reconstruction. METHODS We queried the American College of Surgeons' National Surgical Quality Improvement Program between 2005 and 2018. Current Procedural Terminology code 19364 was used to identify all patients with microsurgical breast reconstruction. Patient demographics, medical comorbidities, preoperative laboratory results, and operative data were analyzed. The primary outcome measure was 30-day unplanned reoperation. RESULTS Of 8449 patients meeting inclusion criteria, 1021 required an unplanned reoperation (12.1%). These patients were more likely to be obese, smokers, hypertensive, on steroids preoperatively, needing concomitant mastectomy, and with prolonged operating room time >9 h (p < .05). Multivariable regression model revealed preoperative steroids intake (OR = 1.92, CI 1.09-3.38, p = .03), concomitant mastectomy (OR = 1.45, CI 1.23-1.71, p < .01), and operating room time >9 h (OR = 1.37, CI 1.16-1.62, p < .01) as independent risk factors. Mastectomy was found to be an independent risk factor for early reoperation, that is, ≤2 days (OR = 1.44, CI 1.14-1.82, p < .01), whereas obesity was an independent risk factor for three reoperations (OR = 3.92, CI 1.14-13.46, p = .03). CONCLUSION Unplanned reoperations within 30-days after microsurgical breast reconstruction are a significant problem. Mastectomy is an independent risk factor for early reoperation whereas obesity is an independent risk factor for multiple reoperations. Identification of such patients preoperatively may help microsurgeons improve patient safety and quality of care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Barkat Ali
- Department of Surgery, Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Eun Ho Eunice Choi
- Statistics and Epidemiology and Research Designs, Clinical and Translational Science Center, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Venus Barlas
- School of Medicine, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Nathan G Menon
- Department of Orthopedics, Hand and Microsurgery, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| | - Nathan T Morrell
- Department of Orthopedics, Hand and Microsurgery, University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Hong WJ, Zhang GY, Chen CL, Li FW, Wang HB. The Effect of Previous Irradiation for Patients With Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-Analysis. Aesthet Surg J 2021; 41:NP748-NP757. [PMID: 33621335 DOI: 10.1093/asj/sjaa372] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Results regarding immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction after postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVES The authors aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of PMRT before immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction for patients with breast cancer. METHODS Electronic databases (PubMed, EmBase, and the Cochrane Library) were systematically searched to identify eligible studies from their inception until March 2020. The pooled odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) was applied as an effect estimate and calculated using the random-effects model. RESULTS Nineteen studies including a total of 6757 patients were selected for final meta-analysis. The pooled OR showed that PMRT was associated with a higher incidence of reconstruction failure (OR = 2.57; 95% CI =1.55-4.26; P < 0.001), capsular contracture (OR = 5.99; 95% CI = 3.12-11.47; P < 0.001), and overall complications (OR = 2.52; 95% CI = 1.68-3.79; P < 0.001). It was also associated with a lower incidence of patient satisfaction (OR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.16-0.52; P < 0.001) and good aesthetic results (OR = 0.25; 95% CI = 0.12-0.52; P < 0.001) compared with those who did not undergo PMRT. These significant associations could be affected by study design, mean age, stage of immediate breast reconstruction, follow-up, and study quality. CONCLUSIONS Although PMRT is the standard adjuvant therapy for mastectomy patients treated with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction, PMRT for patients undergoing immediate implant-based breast reconstruction has been associated with high risks of reconstruction failure, capsular contracture, and overall complications as well as low incidences of patient satisfaction and good aesthetic results. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Wei-Jin Hong
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| | - Guo-Yi Zhang
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| | - Chun-Lin Chen
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| | - Fang-Wei Li
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| | - Hai-Bin Wang
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Guangdong Second Provincial General Hospital, Guangzhou, China
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Filipe MD, de Bock E, Postma EL, Bastian OW, Schellekens PPA, Vriens MR, Witkamp AJ, Richir MC. Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy complication rate compared to traditional nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Robot Surg 2021; 16:265-272. [PMID: 34128142 PMCID: PMC8960562 DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01265-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/04/2021] [Accepted: 06/09/2021] [Indexed: 12/03/2022]
Abstract
Breast cancer is worldwide the most common cause of cancer in women and causes the second most common cancer-related death. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is commonly used in therapeutic and prophylactic settings. Furthermore, (preventive) mastectomies are, besides complications, also associated with psychological and cosmetic consequences. Robotic NSM (RNSM) allows for better visualization of the planes and reducing the invasiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative complication rate of RNSM to NSM. A systematic search was performed on all (R)NSM articles. The primary outcome was determining the overall postoperative complication rate of traditional NSM and RNSM. Secondary outcomes were comparing the specific postoperative complication rates: implant loss, hematoma, (flap)necrosis, infection, and seroma. Forty-nine studies containing 13,886 cases of (R)NSM were included. No statistically significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications (RNSM 3.9%, NSM 7.0%, p = 0.070), postoperative implant loss (RNSM 4.1%, NSM 3.2%, p = 0.523), hematomas (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.059), necrosis (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 7.4%, p = 0.230), infection (RNSM 8.3%, NSM 4.0%, p = 0.054) or seromas (RNSM 3.0%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.421). Overall, there are no statistically significant differences in complication rates between NSM and RNSM.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- M. D. Filipe
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - E. de Bock
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - E. L. Postma
- Department of Surgery, St. Antonius Hospital, Nieuwegein, The Netherlands
| | - O. W. Bastian
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - P. P. A. Schellekens
- Department of Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. R. Vriens
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - A. J. Witkamp
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - M. C. Richir
- Department of Surgery, Cancer Centre, University Medical Centre Utrecht, PO Box 85500, 3508 GA Utrecht, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Yang Q, Zhong X, Zhang W, Luo T, He P, Zheng H. Cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatment approaches for early breast cancer: a retrospective matched cohort study from China. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:107. [PMID: 33530955 PMCID: PMC7856742 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-07840-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/20/2020] [Accepted: 01/26/2021] [Indexed: 02/08/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Both breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction surgery are less popular in China, although they can improve patients’ quality of life. The main reason comes from the economy. There is currently no economic evaluation of different surgical treatment options for early breast cancer. Our study aims to assess the economic impact and long-term cost-effectiveness of different surgical treatments for early breast cancer. The surgical approaches are including mastectomy (MAST), breast-conserving therapy (BCT), and mastectomy with reconstruction (MAST+RECON). Methods Based on demographic data, disease-related information and other treatments, we applied propensity score matching (PSM) to perform 1: 1 matching among patients who underwent these three types of surgery in the tertiary academic medical center from 2011 to 2017 to obtain a balanced sample of covariates between groups. A Markov model was established. Clinical data and cost data were obtained from the medical records. Health utility values were derived from clinical investigations. Strategies were compared using an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). Results After PSM, there were 205 cases in each group. In the matched data set, the distribution of covariates was fully balanced. The total cost of MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT was $37,392.84, $70,556.03 and $82,330.97, respectively. The quality-adjusted life year (QALYs) were 17.11, 18.40 and 20.20, respectively. Compared with MAST, MAST+RECON and BCT have an ICER of $25,707.90/QALY and $14,543.08/QALY, respectively. The ICER of BCT vs. MAST was less than the threshold of $27,931.04. The reliability and stability of the results were confirmed by Monte Carlo simulation and sensitivity analysis. Conclusions We believe that in the context of the limited resources in China, after comparing the three surgical approaches, BCT is the more cost-effective and preferred solution.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Qing Yang
- Institute of Hospital Management, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Xiaorong Zhong
- Department of Head, Neck and Mammary Gland Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.,Laboratory of Molecular Diagnosis of Cancer, Clinical Research Center for Breast, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Wei Zhang
- West China Biomedical Big Data Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, 37 Guo Xue Alley, Chengdu, 610040, Sichuan, China.
| | - Ting Luo
- Department of Head, Neck and Mammary Gland Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Ping He
- Department of Head, Neck and Mammary Gland Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| | - Hong Zheng
- Department of Head, Neck and Mammary Gland Oncology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.,Laboratory of Molecular Diagnosis of Cancer, Clinical Research Center for Breast, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Heller DR, Zhuo H, Zhang Y, Parikh N, Fusi S, Alperovich M, Lannin DR, Higgins SA, Avraham T, Killelea BK. Surgical Outcomes of Mastectomy with Immediate Autologous Reconstruction Followed by Radiation. Ann Surg Oncol 2020; 28:2169-2179. [PMID: 32974699 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09122-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/27/2020] [Accepted: 07/21/2020] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Timing of autologous reconstruction relative to postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is debated. Benefits of immediate reconstruction must be weighed against a possibly heightened risk of complications from flap irradiation. We reviewed flap outcomes after single operation plus PMRT in a large institutional cohort. METHODS Medical records were reviewed for women who underwent simultaneous mastectomy-autologous reconstruction with PMRT from 2007 to 2016. Primary endpoints were rates and types of radiation-related flap complications and reoperations, whose predictors were assessed by multivariable analysis. A p value < 0.10 was deemed significant to avoid type II error. Non-parametric logistic regression generated a model of PMRT timing associated with probabilities of complications and reoperations. RESULTS One-hundred and thirty women underwent 208 mastectomy reconstruction operations, with a median follow up of 35.1 months (interquartile range 23.6-56.5). Forty-seven (36.2%) women experienced radiation-related complications, commonly fat necrosis (44.1%) and chest wall asymmetry (28.8%). Complications were higher among women who received PMRT < 3 months after surgery (46.8% for < 3 months vs. 29.3% for ≥ 3 months; p = 0.06), most of whom received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and among women treated with internal mammary nodal (IMN) radiation (65.2% vs. 26.4%; p < 0.01); IMN radiation remained strongly associated in multivariable analysis (odds ratio [OR] 5.24; p < 0.01). Thirty-two (24.6%) women underwent 70 reoperations, commonly fat grafting (51.9%) and fat necrosis excision (17.1%). Reoperations were higher among women who received PMRT < 3 months after surgery (48.9 for < 3 months vs. 36.6 for ≥ 3 months; p = 0.19), which was significantly associated in multivariable analysis (OR 0.42; p = 0.08 for ≥ 3 months). The probabilities of complications and reoperations were lowest when PMRT was administered ≥ 3 months after surgery. CONCLUSIONS Among a large institutional cohort, immediate autologous reconstruction was associated with similar rates of adverse flap outcomes as historically reported alternatively sequenced protocols. IMN radiation increased risk, while PMRT ≥ 3 months after surgery decreased risk. Additional studies are needed to elaborate the impact of IMN radiation and early PMRT in immediate versus delayed autologous reconstruction.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danielle R Heller
- Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Haoran Zhuo
- School of Public Health, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Yawei Zhang
- School of Public Health, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Nisha Parikh
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Stefano Fusi
- Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Michael Alperovich
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Donald R Lannin
- The Breast Center, Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Susan A Higgins
- Department of Therapeutic Radiology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Tomer Avraham
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Brigid K Killelea
- The Breast Center, Department of Surgery, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
| |
Collapse
|