Karin Isaksson1, Brita Arver2, Matteo Bottai3, Andreas Pettersson4, Marie Wickman1,5, Kerstin Sandelin6. 1. Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 2. Department of Oncology and Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 3. Division of Biostatistics, Institute of Environmental Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. 4. Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Department of Medicine, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Stockholm, Sweden. 5. Sophiahemmet University, Stockholm, Sweden. 6. Department of Molecular Medicine and Surgery, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden. kerstin.sandelin@ki.se.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) is the most effective method to prevent breast cancer in genetically predisposed women and is often performed concomitantly with breast reconstruction. The reconstruction time varies and corrective surgeries are common. METHODS: This study evaluated 185 consecutive cases of BRRM and immediate breast reconstruction with implants with regard to surgical outcome and resource consumption. With an 18-year observation period, it was possible to compare permanent expander implants (PEIs) with permanent fixed volume implants (PIs). RESULTS: A minimum follow-up of 2 years for all participants but one was achieved. Seventy-five percent (n = 138) of the women received PEI and 25% (n = 47) PI. In a multivariate analysis including age, BMI (<25, ≥25), smoking (yes, no), implant type (PEI, PI), incision technique, operation time and specimen weight <350 g, ≥350 g), only BMI ≥25 was associated with an increased risk of an early complication (OR 7.1, 95% CI 2.44-20.4). As expected, there was a significant difference in median reconstruction time between PEI and PI (12.4 vs. 1.0 months, p < 0.001). The cumulative reoperation-free 2-year survival was significantly higher in the PI than in the PEI group (81% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Implant-based reconstruction remains a valid option after BRRM in high-risk women. Whenever possible (low BMI and small breast volume without severe ptosis), permanent fixed volume implants can be safely recommended and are resource saving in comparison with permanent expander implants.
BACKGROUND: Bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) is the most effective method to prevent breast cancer in genetically predisposed women and is often performed concomitantly with breast reconstruction. The reconstruction time varies and corrective surgeries are common. METHODS: This study evaluated 185 consecutive cases of BRRM and immediate breast reconstruction with implants with regard to surgical outcome and resource consumption. With an 18-year observation period, it was possible to compare permanent expander implants (PEIs) with permanent fixed volume implants (PIs). RESULTS: A minimum follow-up of 2 years for all participants but one was achieved. Seventy-five percent (n = 138) of the women received PEI and 25% (n = 47) PI. In a multivariate analysis including age, BMI (<25, ≥25), smoking (yes, no), implant type (PEI, PI), incision technique, operation time and specimen weight <350 g, ≥350 g), only BMI ≥25 was associated with an increased risk of an early complication (OR 7.1, 95% CI 2.44-20.4). As expected, there was a significant difference in median reconstruction time between PEI and PI (12.4 vs. 1.0 months, p < 0.001). The cumulative reoperation-free 2-year survival was significantly higher in the PI than in the PEI group (81% vs. 26%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Implant-based reconstruction remains a valid option after BRRM in high-risk women. Whenever possible (low BMI and small breast volume without severe ptosis), permanent fixed volume implants can be safely recommended and are resource saving in comparison with permanent expander implants.
Authors: L C Hartmann; T A Sellers; D J Schaid; T S Frank; C L Soderberg; D L Sitta; M H Frost; C S Grant; J H Donohue; J E Woods; S K McDonnell; C W Vockley; A Deffenbaugh; F J Couch; R B Jenkins Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2001-11-07 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Colleen M McCarthy; Babak J Mehrara; Elyn Riedel; Kristen Davidge; Akili Hinson; Joseph J Disa; Peter G Cordeiro; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2008-06 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Timothy R Rebbeck; Tara Friebel; Henry T Lynch; Susan L Neuhausen; Laura van 't Veer; Judy E Garber; Gareth R Evans; Steven A Narod; Claudine Isaacs; Ellen Matloff; Mary B Daly; Olufunmilayo I Olopade; Barbara L Weber Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-02-23 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Antônio Luiz Frasson; Martina Lichtenfels; Alessandra Anton Borba de Souza; Betina Vollbrecht; Ana Beatriz Falcone; Mônica Adriana Rodriguez Martinez Frasson; Fernanda Barbosa Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-03-25 Impact factor: 4.872