Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Prepectoral Implant-Based Reconstruction: A Case Report

Endoscopic prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy: First French survey of 10 patients

INTRODUCTION

Current recommendations preconize prophylactic mastectomy for women over 30 with increased risk of breast cancer. Several surgical techniques are available to perform bilateral mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction. Our primary objective was to evaluate the feasibility of the Endoscopic Nipple Sparing Mastectomy (E-NSM) technique, without robotic assistance, using a single axillary incision and with immediate reconstruction using a prepectoral prosthesis in prophylactic indications. The secondary objectives were to evaluate the risks of postoperative complications and the esthetic results.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a preliminary report of a prospective single-center interventional clinical study with a final enrolment target of 20 patients. The primary endpoint was the rate of complete surgical procedures per E-NSM. The secondary endpoints were the rate of conversions to conventional surgery, infections, hematomas, skin injury, pain and esthetic results (Breast-Q questionnaire, additional cosmetic procedures).

RESULTS

From April 2019 to June 2022, 10 patients were included for 19 procedures (9 bilateral mastectomies, 1 unilateral). All surgical procedures were complete; no conversion to conventional surgery was required. The rate of complications per procedure requiring revision surgery was 16 % (1 skin necrosis, 1 postoperative hematoma and 1 surgical site infection). No prosthesis was removed. The seroma rate was 5 %. All patients would recommend this technique and were very satisfied or satisfied with the esthetic result. A second cosmetic procedure (lipofilling) was necessary in 50 % of patients.

DISCUSSION

These preliminary data attest to the feasibility and safety of the E-NSM approach, and should be confirmed on a larger cohort and longer-term follow-up.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT03838549.

To acellular dermal matrix or not to acellular dermal matrix?-outcomes of pre-pectoral prosthetic reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy with and without acellular dermal matrix

Background

Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has been the go-to biomaterial in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction, particularly in pre-pectoral reconstruction. ADM is thought to decrease capsular contracture, control the pocket, and increase soft tissue, but may yield more complications. This study evaluated whether ADM is even needed.

Methods

All patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with pre-pectoral tissue expander (TE) or direct-to-implant (DTI) after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) by the senior author between April 2013 and January 2021, were included in this study. Cohorts were stratified into breasts with ADM or no-ADM. Complications within 30 days post-operatively were analyzed.

Results

A total of 115 pre-pectoral reconstructions were performed in 66 patients. ADM was applied to 75 breasts. TEs were used in 80 breasts and DTI in 35 breasts. Controlling for implant type, breasts with ADM exhibited more nipple necrosis (28.0% vs. 10.0%, P=0.02). Controlling for ADM status, DTI compared to TE was associated with less necrosis of the nipple (11.4% vs. 26.3%, P=0.04), implant loss (5.7% vs. 38.8%, P=0.004), and surgery for any complication (14.3% vs. 27.5%, P=0.04).

Conclusions

Outcomes of prosthetic reconstructions with ADM and no-ADM were similar. DTI reconstruction was associated with less complications, which was likely due to intraoperative bias and placement of TEs more often in breasts with perceived poorer vascularity.

Scarless preventive surgery

Oncogenetic risk‐reduction surgeries could be better accepted if innovation allowed the scars to be hidden. Adnexectomies, vNotes, and endoscopic mastectomies presented here are examples.

Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robotic Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES): a prospective cohort study of the Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) and Korean Breast Cancer Study Group (KBCSG)

BACKGROUND

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has emerged as a new treatment option for breast cancer and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) for women who have a high risk of pathogenic variants. Even though several studies have reported that RNSM is a feasible procedure, some argue that it should only be performed by specialized surgeons, and data on oncologic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are limited. Recently, the United States Food and Drug Administration and several surgeons warned that robotic breast surgery should be performed only by specialized surgeons and recommended that the benefits, risks, and alternatives of all available treatment options be discussed with patients so they can make informed treatment decisions. The Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) has been established to evaluate, standardize, and teach this state-of-the-art procedure. We have designed a multicenter prospective cohort study entitled Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robot Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES) to report surgical, PRO, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

MARRES is a multi-institution cohort study prospectively collecting data from patients undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction. The patient inclusion criteria are adult women older than 19 with breast cancer or a high risk of breast cancer (patients with BRCA1/2, TP53, PALB2 mutations, etc.), who have scheduled therapeutic or RRM and want immediate reconstruction. Surgical outcomes, including pre- and postoperative photos, oncologic outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and PRO, are collected. The primary endpoints are postoperative complication rates within 30 postoperative days and the Clavien-Dindo grade of postoperative complications within 180 postoperative days. The secondary endpoints are 5-year postoperative recurrence-free survival and cancer incidence rate (for those who underwent RRM), patient satisfaction with reconstruction expectations preoperative (baseline) and results within 6 to 12 postoperative months, surgeon satisfaction with postoperative results in 6 postoperative months, and cost-effectiveness of the definitive surgery. Patient recruitment will be completed in April 2025, and the target number of enrolled patients is 2000.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence about the surgical outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and patient satisfaction with RNSM and endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), compared with conventional NSM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04585074. Registered April 8, 2020.

Single-Port Three-Dimensional (3D) Videoscope-Assisted Endoscopic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in the Management of Breast Cancer: Technique, Clinical Outcomes, Medical Cost, Learning Curve, and Patient-Reported Aesthetic Results from 80 Preliminary Procedures

BACKGROUND

The preliminary results of an innovative surgical technique, which incorporated single-port three-dimensional (3D) videoscope and instruments for endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (E-NSM), were reported.

METHODS

The medical records of patients who underwent single-port 3D E-NSM for breast cancer from August 2018 to September 2020 were analyzed, and the preliminary outcome of this procedure as well as the patient-reported aesthetic results are described in this article.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 70 patients who received 80 procedures of single-port 3D E-NSM. The mean operation time was 158 ± 36 min, and the mean blood loss was 41 ± 26 ml. Three procedures (3.8 %) associated with delayed axillary wound-healing, eight cases of transient nipple ischemia (10 %), three cases of partial nipple ischemia/necrosis (3.7 %), and one case of total nipple-areolar complex (NAC) necrosis (1.3 %) were observed. No patient had margin involvement. Satisfaction rates of approximately 90 % were observed in terms of postoperative scar appearance, location, and length. Most of the patients (87.8 %) reported that they would choose the same operation again if given the chance to do so. The overall cost of a single-port 3D E-NSM was 7522 ± 470 U.S. dollars. According to cumulative sum (CUSUM) plot analysis, about 14 cases were needed for surgeons to familiarize themselves with single-port 3D E-NSM and immediate gel implant reconstruction and to decrease their operation time significantly in the initial learning phase.

CONCLUSION

Single-port 3D E-NSM, a safe, efficient, lower-cost procedure, is associated with a good aesthetic result. It is a promising new technique for breast cancer patients indicated for mastectomy, but long-term oncologic safety follow-up evaluation still is needed.