BACKGROUND: The authors refine their anatomical patient selection criteria with a novel midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement for nipple-sparing mastectomy performed through an inframammary approach. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed of all nipple-sparing mastectomies performed through an inframammary approach. Exclusion criteria included other mastectomy incisions, staged mastectomy, previous breast operation, and autologous reconstruction. Preoperative anatomical measurements for each breast, clinical course, and specimen weight were obtained. RESULTS: One hundred forty breasts in 79 patients were analyzed. Mastectomy weight, but not sternal notch-to-nipple distance, was strongly correlated with midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement on linear regression (R = 0.651; p < 0.001). Mastectomy weight was not correlated with ptosis. Twenty-five breasts (17.8 percent) had ischemic complications: 16 (11.4 percent) were nonoperative and nine (6.4 percent) were operative. Those with mastectomy weights of 500 g or greater were nine times more likely to have operative ischemic complications than those with mastectomy weights less than 500 g (p = 0.0048). Those with a midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement of 30 cm or greater had a 3.8 times increased incidence of any ischemic complication (p = 0.00547) and a 9.2 times increased incidence of operative ischemic complications (p = 0.00376) compared with those whose midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement was less than 30 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Breasts undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy by means of an inframammary approach with midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement greater than or equal to 30 cm are at higher risk for having ischemic complications, warranting consideration for a staged approach or other incision. The midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement is useful for assessing the entire breast and predicting the likelihood of ischemic complications in inframammary nipple-sparing mastectomies. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.
BACKGROUND: The authors refine their anatomical patient selection criteria with a novel midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement for nipple-sparing mastectomy performed through an inframammary approach. METHODS: Retrospective review was performed of all nipple-sparing mastectomies performed through an inframammary approach. Exclusion criteria included other mastectomy incisions, staged mastectomy, previous breast operation, and autologous reconstruction. Preoperative anatomical measurements for each breast, clinical course, and specimen weight were obtained. RESULTS: One hundred forty breasts in 79 patients were analyzed. Mastectomy weight, but not sternal notch-to-nipple distance, was strongly correlated with midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement on linear regression (R = 0.651; p < 0.001). Mastectomy weight was not correlated with ptosis. Twenty-five breasts (17.8 percent) had ischemic complications: 16 (11.4 percent) were nonoperative and nine (6.4 percent) were operative. Those with mastectomy weights of 500 g or greater were nine times more likely to have operative ischemic complications than those with mastectomy weights less than 500 g (p = 0.0048). Those with a midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement of 30 cm or greater had a 3.8 times increased incidence of any ischemic complication (p = 0.00547) and a 9.2 times increased incidence of operative ischemic complications (p = 0.00376) compared with those whose midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement was less than 30 cm. CONCLUSIONS: Breasts undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy by means of an inframammary approach with midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement greater than or equal to 30 cm are at higher risk for having ischemic complications, warranting consideration for a staged approach or other incision. The midclavicular-to-inframammary fold measurement is useful for assessing the entire breast and predicting the likelihood of ischemic complications in inframammary nipple-sparing mastectomies. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.