Purpose: Ipsilateral-breast-local-recurrence (ILBLR) is a rare event with little data on immediate-breast-reconstruction (IBR). We report post-operative results of different types of mastectomy for ILBLR with or without IBR performed during a period of 40 months in order to analyze post-operative complications as main objective. Methods: We analyzed mastectomies performed for ILBLR after initial breast conservative treatment from January 2016 to April 2019. The characteristics of patients, surgery, complication rate, postoperative hospitalization have been determined. Results: Of the 207 mastectomies, 32.8% had an IBR: 31 nipple-sparing-mastectomy (NSM) and 37 skin-sparing-mastectomy (SSM) with 37 latissimus-dorsi-flap (LDF) IBR and 31 implant-IBR. Few reconstruction was performed for patients with body-mass-index ≥30 (OR = 0.214), infiltrating ductal carcinomas (OR = 0.272) and ASA-3 patients (OR = 0.254). In multivariate analysis, LDF-IBR was more often realized for NSM and for patients with BMI ≥25. The overall complication rate was 37.4%: 45.6 and 33.1% with and without IBR, respectively (p = 0.056). In multivariate analysis, BMI ≥25 (OR 2.02, p = 0.023), IBR (OR 1.9, p = 0.046) and tobacco (OR 2.17, p = 0.055) were correlated with higher risk of complications. There was no difference for Grade 2-3 complications rates for IBR and no IBR, respectively (14.7%: 10/68 and 9.3%: 13/139). In multivariate analysis, overall survival from date of mastectomy for local recurrence was significantly associated with interval time to local recurrence (OR 6.981). Conclusion: Salvage mastectomy and IBR is a good choice for ILBLR, particularly using flap reconstruction. NSM can be considered as a good option in selected patients for ILBLR for NSM and/or LDFR.
Purpose: Ipsilateral-breast-local-recurrence (ILBLR) is a rare event with little data on immediate-breast-reconstruction (IBR). We report post-operative results of different types of mastectomy for ILBLR with or without IBR performed during a period of 40 months in order to analyze post-operative complications as main objective. Methods: We analyzed mastectomies performed for ILBLR after initial breast conservative treatment from January 2016 to April 2019. The characteristics of patients, surgery, complication rate, postoperative hospitalization have been determined. Results: Of the 207 mastectomies, 32.8% had an IBR: 31 nipple-sparing-mastectomy (NSM) and 37 skin-sparing-mastectomy (SSM) with 37 latissimus-dorsi-flap (LDF) IBR and 31 implant-IBR. Few reconstruction was performed for patients with body-mass-index ≥30 (OR = 0.214), infiltrating ductal carcinomas (OR = 0.272) and ASA-3 patients (OR = 0.254). In multivariate analysis, LDF-IBR was more often realized for NSM and for patients with BMI ≥25. The overall complication rate was 37.4%: 45.6 and 33.1% with and without IBR, respectively (p = 0.056). In multivariate analysis, BMI ≥25 (OR 2.02, p = 0.023), IBR (OR 1.9, p = 0.046) and tobacco (OR 2.17, p = 0.055) were correlated with higher risk of complications. There was no difference for Grade 2-3 complications rates for IBR and no IBR, respectively (14.7%: 10/68 and 9.3%: 13/139). In multivariate analysis, overall survival from date of mastectomy for local recurrence was significantly associated with interval time to local recurrence (OR 6.981). Conclusion: Salvage mastectomy and IBR is a good choice for ILBLR, particularly using flap reconstruction. NSM can be considered as a good option in selected patients for ILBLR for NSM and/or LDFR.
Authors: Cindy H Wei; Amie M Scott; Alison N Price; Helen Catherine Miller; Anne F Klassen; Sabrina M Jhanwar; Babak J Mehrara; Joseph J Disa; Colleen McCarthy; Evan Matros; Peter G Cordeiro; Virgilio Sacchini; Andrea L Pusic Journal: Breast J Date: 2016 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Benjamin Sarfati; Samuel Struk; Nicolas Leymarie; Jean-François Honart; Heba Alkhashnam; Kim Tran de Fremicourt; Angelica Conversano; Françoise Rimareix; Marie Simon; Stefan Michiels; Frédéric Kolb Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2018-06-29 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: David A Daar; Salma A Abdou; Lauren Rosario; William J Rifkin; Pauline J Santos; Garrett A Wirth; Karen T Lane Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Date: 2019-05 Impact factor: 4.730
Authors: Z K Algaithy; J Y Petit; V Lohsiriwat; P Maisonneuve; P C Rey; N Baros; H Lai; P Mulas; D M Barbalho; P Veronesi; M Rietjens Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2011-11-06 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: William J Gradishar; Benjamin O Anderson; Jame Abraham; Rebecca Aft; Doreen Agnese; Kimberly H Allison; Sarah L Blair; Harold J Burstein; Chau Dang; Anthony D Elias; Sharon H Giordano; Matthew P Goetz; Lori J Goldstein; Steven J Isakoff; Jairam Krishnamurthy; Janice Lyons; P Kelly Marcom; Jennifer Matro; Ingrid A Mayer; Meena S Moran; Joanne Mortimer; Ruth M O'Regan; Sameer A Patel; Lori J Pierce; Hope S Rugo; Amy Sitapati; Karen Lisa Smith; Mary Lou Smith; Hatem Soliman; Erica M Stringer-Reasor; Melinda L Telli; John H Ward; Jessica S Young; Jennifer L Burns; Rashmi Kumar Journal: J Natl Compr Canc Netw Date: 2020-04 Impact factor: 11.908
Authors: Rong Tang; Suzanne B Coopey; Amy S Colwell; Michelle C Specht; Michele A Gadd; Kari Kansal; Maureen P McEvoy; Andrea L Merrill; Upahvan Rai; Alphonse Taghian; William G Austen; Barbara L Smith Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-07-23 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Justin M Broyles; Ethan M Balk; Gaelen P Adam; Wangnan Cao; Monika Reddy Bhuma; Shivani Mehta; Laura S Dominici; Andrea L Pusic; Ian J Saldanha Journal: Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open Date: 2022-03-11