Edwin G Wilkins1, Jennifer B Hamill1, Hyungjin M Kim2, John Y Kim3, Richard J Greco4, Ji Qi1, Andrea L Pusic5. 1. Section of Plastic Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 2. Center for Statistical Consultation and Research, University of Michigan, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI. 3. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL. 4. The Georgia Institute for Plastic Surgery, Savannah, GA. 5. Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In postmastectomy reconstruction, procedure choice is heavily influenced by the relative risks of the various options. This study sought to evaluate complications in a large, multicenter patient population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies have reported widely varying complication rates, but have been limited by their single center designs and inadequate controlling for confounders in their analyses. METHODS: Eleven sites enrolled women undergoing first time, immediate, or delayed reconstruction following mastectomy for cancer treatment or prophylaxis. Procedures included expander/implant, latissimus dorsi (LD), pedicle transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (PTRAM), free TRAM (FTRAM), and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) techniques. Data were gathered pre- and postoperatively from medical records. Separate logistic regressions were conducted for all complications and major complications (those requiring rehospitalization and/or reoperation) within 1 year. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for procedure type, controlling for site, demographic, and clinical variables. RESULTS: Complication rates for 2234 patients were analyzed. Compared with expander/implant reconstructions, LD (OR) 1.95, P = 0.026), PTRAM (OR 1.89, P = 0.025), FTRAM (OR 1.94, P = 0.011), and DIEP (OR 2.22, P < 0.001) procedures were associated with higher risks of complications. Significantly higher risks were also associated with older age, higher body mass index (BMI), immediate reconstruction, bilateral procedures, and radiation. For major complications, regression showed significantly greater risks for PTRAM (OR 1.86, P = 0.044) and DIEP (OR 1.75, P = 0.004), than expander/implant reconstructions. Failure rates were relatively low, ranging from 0% for PTRAM to 5.9% for expander/implant reconstructions. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter analysis, procedure choice and other patient variables were significant predictors of 1-year complications in breast reconstruction. These findings should be considered in counseling patients on reconstructive options.
OBJECTIVE: In postmastectomy reconstruction, procedure choice is heavily influenced by the relative risks of the various options. This study sought to evaluate complications in a large, multicenter patient population. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Previous studies have reported widely varying complication rates, but have been limited by their single center designs and inadequate controlling for confounders in their analyses. METHODS: Eleven sites enrolled women undergoing first time, immediate, or delayed reconstruction following mastectomy for cancer treatment or prophylaxis. Procedures included expander/implant, latissimus dorsi (LD), pedicle transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous (PTRAM), free TRAM (FTRAM), and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) techniques. Data were gathered pre- and postoperatively from medical records. Separate logistic regressions were conducted for all complications and major complications (those requiring rehospitalization and/or reoperation) within 1 year. Odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for procedure type, controlling for site, demographic, and clinical variables. RESULTS: Complication rates for 2234 patients were analyzed. Compared with expander/implant reconstructions, LD (OR) 1.95, P = 0.026), PTRAM (OR 1.89, P = 0.025), FTRAM (OR 1.94, P = 0.011), and DIEP (OR 2.22, P < 0.001) procedures were associated with higher risks of complications. Significantly higher risks were also associated with older age, higher body mass index (BMI), immediate reconstruction, bilateral procedures, and radiation. For major complications, regression showed significantly greater risks for PTRAM (OR 1.86, P = 0.044) and DIEP (OR 1.75, P = 0.004), than expander/implant reconstructions. Failure rates were relatively low, ranging from 0% for PTRAM to 5.9% for expander/implant reconstructions. CONCLUSION: In this multicenter analysis, procedure choice and other patient variables were significant predictors of 1-year complications in breast reconstruction. These findings should be considered in counseling patients on reconstructive options.
Authors: Jesse C Selber; Meredith Bergey; Seema S Sonnad; Stephen Kovach; Liza Wu; Joseph M Serletti Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2009-10 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Elliot M Hirsch; Akhil K Seth; John Y S Kim; Gregory A Dumanian; Thomas A Mustoe; Robert D Galiano; Neil A Fine Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Yoon S Chun; Indranil Sinha; Arthur Turko; Janet H Yueh; Stuart Lipsitz; Julian J Pribaz; Bernard T Lee Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2010-10 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: E A Krueger; E G Wilkins; M Strawderman; P Cederna; S Goldfarb; F A Vicini; L J Pierce Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2001-03-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jigna Desai Jhaveri; Stephen C Rush; Karen Kostroff; Dwight Derisi; Leonard A Farber; Virginia E Maurer; Jay L Bosworth Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2008-05-28 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jonas A Nelson; Sophocles H Voineskos; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Reshma Jagsi; Adeyiza O Momoh; Ji Qi; Jennifer B Hamill; Jessica Billig; Hyungjin M Kim; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2018-02-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Katherine B Santosa; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Katelyn G Bennett; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins Journal: JAMA Surg Date: 2018-10-01 Impact factor: 14.766
Authors: Labrinus van Manen; Willem A J Birkhoff; Jeroen Eggermont; Richelle J M Hoveling; Philip Nicklin; Jacobus Burggraaf; Roger Wilson; J Sven D Mieog; Dominic J Robinson; Alexander L Vahrmeijer; Michelle S Bradbury; Jouke Dijkstra Journal: Quant Imaging Med Surg Date: 2021-09
Authors: Meghana G Shamsunder; Hina Panchal; Melissa Pilewskie; Clara Lee; Shantanu N Razdan; Evan Matros Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2021-08-23 Impact factor: 6.532
Authors: Jessica Erdmann-Sager; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic; Ji Qi; Jennifer B Hamill; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Gretchen E Guldbrandsen; Yoon S Chun Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 4.730