M Javaid1, F Song, S Leinster, M G Dickson, N K James. 1. Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Lister Hospital Stevenage and School of Medicine, Health Policy and Practice University of East Anglia, Norwich NR4 7TJ, UK. drjav@hotmail.com
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to gather the available evidence on the optimum timing of the radiotherapy in relation to autologous breast reconstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data was extracted from scientific databases, and a manual follow-up of references. The studies were selected which included at least 20 patients with any method of autologous breast reconstruction who were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy either before or after their reconstruction, and had addressed the effects of radiotherapy on the cosmetic outcome in their results. The principal outcome was cosmetic appearance. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed complications. RESULTS: We could not find any randomised controlled trial on this topic. Ten studies were included, most were retrospective, heterogeneous in terms of control groups, radiation doses, follow-up duration, and outcome measurements. Two studies included no control groups, and four studies compared the outcomes of patients with radiotherapy either before (n=3) or after (n=1) autologous breast reconstruction. The overall incidence of complications was increased in patients with radiotherapy in three out of these four studies. Only four studies directly compared the outcomes of patients who received radiotherapy before with patients who received radiotherapy after autologous breast reconstruction and two out of these reported worse outcomes associated with post-reconstruction radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the paucity of the published data, the current evidence suggests that the radiation has a deleterious effect on autologous flap reconstruction. Until better methods of radiation delivery can be devised to minimise the long term radiation sequelae in the irradiated tissue, delayed reconstruction seems to be a safe option in most of the cases. However, the findings from these studies should be interpreted with great caution before generalising from their results.
OBJECTIVE: To conduct a systematic review to gather the available evidence on the optimum timing of the radiotherapy in relation to autologous breast reconstruction. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The data was extracted from scientific databases, and a manual follow-up of references. The studies were selected which included at least 20 patients with any method of autologous breast reconstruction who were treated with adjuvant radiotherapy either before or after their reconstruction, and had addressed the effects of radiotherapy on the cosmetic outcome in their results. The principal outcome was cosmetic appearance. Secondary outcomes were immediate and delayed complications. RESULTS: We could not find any randomised controlled trial on this topic. Ten studies were included, most were retrospective, heterogeneous in terms of control groups, radiation doses, follow-up duration, and outcome measurements. Two studies included no control groups, and four studies compared the outcomes of patients with radiotherapy either before (n=3) or after (n=1) autologous breast reconstruction. The overall incidence of complications was increased in patients with radiotherapy in three out of these four studies. Only four studies directly compared the outcomes of patients who received radiotherapy before with patients who received radiotherapy after autologous breast reconstruction and two out of these reported worse outcomes associated with post-reconstruction radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the paucity of the published data, the current evidence suggests that the radiation has a deleterious effect on autologous flap reconstruction. Until better methods of radiation delivery can be devised to minimise the long term radiation sequelae in the irradiated tissue, delayed reconstruction seems to be a safe option in most of the cases. However, the findings from these studies should be interpreted with great caution before generalising from their results.
Authors: Yue-Yung Hu; Christine M Weeks; Haejin In; Christopher M Dodgion; Mehra Golshan; Yoon S Chun; Michael J Hassett; Katherine A Corso; Xiangmei Gu; Stuart R Lipsitz; Caprice C Greenberg Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-01-24 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: L S E van Egdom; K M de Ligt; L de Munck; L B Koppert; M A M Mureau; H A Rakhorst; S Siesling Journal: Breast Cancer Date: 2021-11-15 Impact factor: 4.239