| Literature DB >> 29725545 |
M E Pontell1, N Saad2, A Brown3, M Rose4, R Ashinoff4, A Saad4.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Given the proposed increased risk of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) necrosis, nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is generally not recommended for patients with large or significantly ptotic breasts. NAC preserving strategies in this subgroup include staged or simultaneous NSM and reduction mastopexy. We present a novel approach towards simultaneous NSM and reduction mastopexy in patients with large, ptotic breasts.Entities:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29725545 PMCID: PMC5867609 DOI: 10.1155/2018/9205805
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Plast Surg Int ISSN: 2090-1461
Figure 1Artist's depiction of the breast ptosis grading system proposed by Regnault et al. Normal: areola above the inframammary fold (IMF) and above the gland contour; Grade I: areola at the IMF and above the gland contour; Grade II: areola below the IMF and above the gland contour; Grade III: areola below the IMF and below the gland contour; Pseudoptosis: areola at the IMF with glandular ptosis; Parenchymal Maldistribution: areola at the IMF with loose, hypoplastic glandular skin.
Figure 2Artist's depiction of pre- and postoperative markings for simultaneous nipple-sparing mastectomy and reduction mastopexy. A “boomerang” shaped supra-areolar incision is made, through which breast tissue and a variable amount of skin are excised. The edges are reapproximated after insertion of a tissue expander.
Patient characteristics and procedural specifics.
| Pt | Age | Sex | Smoker | PMH | Indication | Ptosis grade | Technique | Expander size | Breast volume excised (R/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 55 | F | No | Hypertension | Biopsy with atypical cells in the setting of bilateral silicone injections | III | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 350 cc | 665 gr/740 gr |
|
| |||||||||
| 2 | 30 | F | No | Asthma, depression | BRCA mutation | III | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 800 cc | 1240 gr/1316 gr |
|
| |||||||||
| 3 | 54 | F | No | Gastric cancer, thyroid disease, peripheral neuropathy | BRCA mutation | III | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 400 cc | 429 gr/449 gr |
|
| |||||||||
| 4 | 58 | F | No | Thyroid disease | BRCA mutation | III | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 800 cc | 1006 gr/776 gr |
|
| |||||||||
| 5 | 52 | F | Yes | None | Unilateral, multifocal DCIS | III | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and DIEP flap reconstruction | N/A | NR |
|
| |||||||||
| 6 | 58 | F | No | Hypertension, diabetes mellitus | Unilateral invasive breast cancer, BRCA | III/II | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and DIEP flap reconstruction | N/A | 546 gr/436 gr |
|
| |||||||||
| 7 | 32 | F | Yes | None | Unilateral invasive breast cancer | II | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 500 cc | NR |
|
| |||||||||
| 8 | 55 | F | Yes | Ovarian cancer, thyroid disease | BRCA | II | Bilateral NSM with reduction mammaplasty and expander insertion | 500 cc | NR |
PMH: past medical history; R: right; L: left; B/L: bilateral; NSM: nipple-sparing mastectomy; BRCA: breast cancer susceptibility gene; DCIS: ductal carcinoma in situ; N/A: not applicable; DIEP: deep inferior epigastric perforator; NR: not reported.
Breasts that did not experience NAC necrosis stratified by individual mastectomy.
| Pt. | NAC necrosis | Wound complications | Age | Smoker | PMH | Indication | Ptosis grade | Reconstruction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 (R) | No | Hematoma | 55 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 1 (L) | No | None | 55 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 2 (R) | No | None | 30 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 2 (L) | No | None | 30 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 3 (R) | No | None | 54 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 3 (L) | No | None | 54 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 4 (R) | No | None | 58 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 4 (L) | No | None | 58 | N | Y | Prophylactic | III | Expander |
| 6 (L) | No | None | 58 | N | Y | Therapeutic | II | DIEP |
| 6 (R) | No | None | 58 | N | Y | Therapeutic | III | DIEP |
| 7 (L) | No | None | 32 | Y | N | Therapeutic | II | Expander |
Pt.: patient number; NAC: nipple-areolar complex; PMH: past medical history; N: no; Y: yes; R: right breast; L: left breast; DIEP: deep inferior epigastric perforator.
Breasts that experienced NAC necrosis stratified by individual mastectomy.
| Pt. | NAC necrosis | Wound complications | Age | Smoker | PMH | Indication | Ptosis grade | Reconstruction |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 5 (R) | Partial | None | 52 | Y | N | Therapeutic | III | DIEP |
| 5 (L) | Total | Flap necrosis | 52 | Y | N | Therapeutic | III | DIEP |
| 7 (R) | Partial | None | 32 | Y | N | Therapeutic | II | Expander |
| 8 (R) | Total | Seroma | 55 | Y | Y | Prophylactic | II | Expander |
| 8 (L) | Total | Seroma | 55 | Y | Y | Prophylactic | II | Expander |
Pt.: patient number; NAC: nipple-areolar complex; R: right breast; L: left breast; Y: yes; N: no; DIEP: deep inferior epigastric perforator.
Breasts that experienced NAC necrosis compared to those that did not.
| Group | Number of breasts | Avg. age | Smokers | Comorbidities present | Therapeutic versus prophylactic | Ptosis grade (II versus III) | Expander versus DIEP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NAC necrosis | 5 | 59 years | 100% | 20% | 60% versus 40% | 60% versus 40% | 60% versus 40% |
| NAC intact | 11 | 49 years | 9% | 91% | 27% versus 73% | 19% versus 81% | 81% versus 19% |
NAC: nipple-areolar complex; Avg.: average; DIEP: deep inferior epigastric perforator.
Figure 3Pre- (a) and postoperative (b) photographs after simultaneous nipple-sparing mastectomy and reduction mastopexy with implant-based reconstruction.
Table reviewing all of the studies published on nipple-sparing mastectomy in large-volume, ptotic breasts from 1970 to 2016.
| Technique | Reconstruction | Sample size (number of breasts) | Indication | Ptosis/breast volume | Partial NAC necrosis | Total NAC necrosis | Other complications | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Goulian & McDivitt, 1972 | SCM with reduction mastopexy | Implant | 24 | Risk reduction | Medium-large | None | None | Hematoma (NR) |
|
| ||||||||
| Biggs et al., 1977 | SCM with reduction mastopexy | Implant | 33 | NR | Not specified | None | None | Partial flap necrosis (1) |
|
| ||||||||
| Jarrett et al., 1978 | SCM, reduction mastopexy, and free nipple graft | Implant | 44 | Risk reduction | Large volume | None | None | NR |
|
| ||||||||
| Gibson, 1979 | SCM with reduction mastopexy | NR | NR | Risk reduction | Not specified | None | None | NR |
|
| ||||||||
| Rusby & Gui, 2010 | NSM with reduction mastopexy | Expander | 16 | Risk reduction | NR | NR | 6.3% | None |
|
| ||||||||
| Nava et al., 2011 | NSM with reduction mastopexy | Implant | 13 | Therapeutic | NR | NR# | NR# | NR# |
|
| ||||||||
| Rivolin et al., 2012 | NSM with periareolar pexy | Implant | 22 | Therapeutic | Medium-large volume | 13.6% | 4.6% | None |
|
| ||||||||
| Al-Mufarrej et al., 2013 | NSM with reduction mastopexy | Expander | 48 | Risk reduction | Large volume | 8.3% | 4.2% | Infected implant (2.1%) |
|
| ||||||||
| Pontell et al., 2016 (this report) | NSM with reduction mastopexy | Expander | 16 | Risk reduction | Large volume | 0% | 0% | Hematoma |
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
|
| ||||||||
| Schneider et al., 2012 | NSM with immediate flap placement and staged reduction mastopexy | TUG Flap | 34 | NR | Large volume | None | 3% | Hematoma (3%) |
|
| ||||||||
| DellaCroce et al., 2015 | NSM with immediate flap placement and staged reduction mastopexy | DIEP Flap | 110 | Risk reduction | Medium-large volume | None | None | Partial mastectomy flap necrosis (3.6%) |
|
| ||||||||
| Spear et al., 2012 | Reduction mastopexy followed by NSM | Implant | 24 | Risk reduction | Medium volume | 12.5% | None | Breast infection (8%) |
NAC: nipple-areolar complex; NSM: nipple-sparing mastectomy; SCM: subcutaneous mastectomy; NR: not reported; DIEP: deep inferior epigastric perforator; TUG: transverse upper gracilis; SGAP: superior gluteal artery perforator. #Complications were not stratified by NSM (SRM) versus SSM status. This study mentions the exclusion of one patient who had total NAC necrosis. These rates exclude the patients who were smokers, including patients with partial and total NAC necrosis rates of 12.5% and 18.7%, respectively.
Figure 4Artist's depiction of the arterial supply (right breast) and venous drainage (left breast) to the nipple-areolar complex (NAC). The most important contributor to NAC perfusion arises from the third internal thoracic artery perforator (a). This branch travels medially from its origin and courses just under the NAC where it gives off tributaries to the periareolar network. The anterior intercostal arteries originate more inferiorly and course along the inframammary fold before giving their contributions to the arterial supply of the NAC (b). The NAC is drained through superior (c) and inferior (d) horizontal venous slings that ultimately drain into the thoracic and subclavian veins [17, 19].