Sukru Yazar1, Fuat Baris Bengur2, Altug Altinkaya2, Halil Kara3, Cihan Uras3. 1. Department of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Kayisdagi Caddesi, No:32 Atasehir, 34752, Istanbul, Turkey. sukruyazar@hotmail.com. 2. Department of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Kayisdagi Caddesi, No:32 Atasehir, 34752, Istanbul, Turkey. 3. Department of General Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction are becoming preferred options with improved outcomes. However, reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts is challenging. When mastectomy and skin reduction are combined in a single-staged procedure, the vasculature of the skin is disturbed leading to increased complication rates. This paper aims to compare complication rates of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with or without reduction to determine the safety of reduction in this patient group. METHODS: Breast cancer patients that underwent NSM and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction between November 2010 and 2018 were analyzed. All implants were placed submuscularly. Patients with skin reduction and nipple-areolar complex transposition were matched in a 1:1 fashion with patients without reduction. RESULTS: There were 50 patients (72 procedures) in each group. Demographics of the groups were similar as a part of matching process. Mean implant volume in the reduction group was higher (399.93 ± 97.54 vs. 360.21 ± 82.54, p = 0.009). Full thickness skin necrosis rate was higher in the reduction group [12/72 (%17) vs. 2/72 (3%), p = 0.009], and the most common site was over the suture line [6/12 (50%)]. Complications in the reduction group were more common in reconstructions with implant volumes greater than 500 cc (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with no reduction, the skin necrosis rate of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with skin reduction is higher. The described technique can only be considered in patients with moderate breast volumes, grade II-III ptosis, and when the planned implant volume is low (< 500 cc). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction are becoming preferred options with improved outcomes. However, reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts is challenging. When mastectomy and skin reduction are combined in a single-staged procedure, the vasculature of the skin is disturbed leading to increased complication rates. This paper aims to compare complication rates of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with or without reduction to determine the safety of reduction in this patient group. METHODS:Breast cancerpatients that underwent NSM and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction between November 2010 and 2018 were analyzed. All implants were placed submuscularly. Patients with skin reduction and nipple-areolar complex transposition were matched in a 1:1 fashion with patients without reduction. RESULTS: There were 50 patients (72 procedures) in each group. Demographics of the groups were similar as a part of matching process. Mean implant volume in the reduction group was higher (399.93 ± 97.54 vs. 360.21 ± 82.54, p = 0.009). Full thickness skin necrosis rate was higher in the reduction group [12/72 (%17) vs. 2/72 (3%), p = 0.009], and the most common site was over the suture line [6/12 (50%)]. Complications in the reduction group were more common in reconstructions with implant volumes greater than 500 cc (p = 0.008). CONCLUSIONS: When compared with no reduction, the skin necrosis rate of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with skin reduction is higher. The described technique can only be considered in patients with moderate breast volumes, grade II-III ptosis, and when the planned implant volume is low (< 500 cc). LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV. This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
Entities:
Keywords:
Breast reconstruction; Breast reduction; Implant-based immediate breast reconstruction; Mammaplasty; Nipple-sparing mastectomy
Authors: Jill Dietz; P Lundgren; A Veeramani; C O'Rourke; S Bernard; R Djohan; J Larson; R Isakov; R Yetman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-08-10 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Claudia R Albornoz; Peter B Bach; Babak J Mehrara; Joseph J Disa; Andrea L Pusic; Colleen M McCarthy; Peter G Cordeiro; Evan Matros Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Constance M Chen; Joseph J Disa; Virgilio Sacchini; Andrea L Pusic; Babak J Mehrara; Carlos A Garcia-Etienne; Peter G Cordeiro Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Frank J DellaCroce; Craig A Blum; Scott K Sullivan; Alan Stolier; Chris Trahan; M Whitten Wise; Dustin Duracher Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.730