Comparison of one-stage vs two-stage prosthesis-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Silicone implant surface microtopography modulates inflammation and tissue repair in capsular fibrosis

Excessive fibrous capsule formation around silicone mammary implants (SMI) involves immune reactions to silicone. Capsular fibrosis, a common SMI complication linked to host responses, worsens with specific implant topographies. Our study with 10 patients investigated intra- and inter-individually, reduced surface roughness effects on disease progression, wound responses, chronic inflammation, and capsular composition. The results illuminate the significant impact of surface roughness on acute inflammatory responses, fibrinogen accumulation, and the subsequent fibrotic cascade. The reduction of surface roughness to an average roughness of 4 μm emerges as a promising approach for mitigating detrimental immune reactions, promoting healthy wound healing, and curbing excessive fibrosis. The identified proteins adhering to rougher surfaces shed light on potential mediators of pro-inflammatory and pro-fibrotic processes, further emphasizing the need for meticulous consideration of surface design. The composition of the implant capsule and the discovery of intracapsular HSP60 expression highlight the intricate web of stress responses and immune activation that can impact long-term tissue outcomes.

Less is more? One-stage versus two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction: A systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies

BACKGROUND

Most breast reconstructions are implant-based and can be performed either in a one-stage, direct-to-implant or in a two-stage, expander-implant-based reconstruction. The objective of this systematic review is to compare the safety and patient satisfaction of the two reconstruction approaches.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted on 27 September 2022 using various databases. Studies comparing one-stage and two-stage implant reconstructions and reporting the following outcomes were included: patient satisfaction, aesthetics, complications, and/or costs. Reviews, case reports, or series with less than 20 patients and letters or comments were excluded. Comparisons were made between the one-stage reconstruction with and without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction groups. The data extracted from all articles were analysed using random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Of the 1381 records identified, a total of 33 articles were included, representing 21529 patients. There were no significant differences between the one-stage and two-stage groups, except for the costs. The one-stage operation without ADM had lower costs than the two-stage operation without ADM, although the use of an ADM substantially increased the price of the operation to more than a two-stage reconstruction.

DISCUSSION

Equal patient satisfaction, aesthetic outcomes, and complication rates with lower costs justify one-stage breast reconstruction in carefully selected patients. This review shows that there is no evidence-based superior surgical approach. Future research should focus on the costs of the ADM versus an additional stage and patient-reported outcomes.

The Impact of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on Immediate Prepectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Immediate prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) rates have increased in recent years owing to improved cosmetic and psychological benefits. However, there is a lack of studies regarding complications rates following adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) among patients undergoing immediate prepectoral IBBR.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective monocentric analysis of a cohort of consecutively treated patients who underwent NSM following immediate prepectoral IBBR at our institution between March 2017 and November 2021. Patient demographics, quality of life, complication rates, and oncological safety were evaluated in the RT and non-RT groups. Data analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Version 24 (IMB Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

RESULTS

A total of 98 patients were examined: 70 were assigned to have prepectoral IBBR without RT and 28 to the group who had prepectoral IBBR with RT. There was a statistically significant difference in overall capsular contracture rate between the RT and non-RT group (18% vs. 4.3%, p=0.04). The total implant loss in the cohort was 4% (10.7% vs. 1.4%, p=0.05). We obtained a high percentages of all BREAST-Q categories in both groups; however, satisfaction with the breast and sexual well-being was higher in the non-RT group. The three-year overall survivals were 97.4% in the RT group and 98.5% in the non-RT group.

CONCLUSION

Our findings showed that patients in the RT group had a higher rate of capsular contracture and implant loss than those in the non-RT group. However, complication rates were within acceptable range and with accurate preoperative information patients have more benefits from immediate reconstruction showing excellent overall quality of life irrespectively of radiation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

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 .

Factors Associated with Reconstruction Failure and Major Complications After Postmastectomy Radiation to a Reconstructed Breast

PURPOSE

Postmastectomy radiation therapy is known to increase risk of complications in the reconstruction setting. We aim to identify the variables associated with reconstruction failure and other major complications.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

A prospectively collected institutional database was queried for patients with up to stage IIIC breast cancer treated from 2000 to 2017, undergoing mastectomy, immediate implant or autologous tissue reconstruction, and radiation to the reconstructed breast within 1 year of surgery. Reconstruction failure was defined as complication requiring surgical revision or implant removal. Additional major complications were defined as any infection, contracture, necrosis, or fibrosis. Covariates of interest included age, body mass index, smoking status, stage, hormone receptor and HER2 status, systemic therapy timing, radiation technique, nodal irradiation, and interval between surgery and start of postmastectomy radiation therapy. Differences in complication rates were assessed with χ² or Fisher exact tests. Competing risk regression was used to estimate hazard ratios; covariates were included one at a time to avoid over adjustment.

RESULTS

A total of 206 reconstructed breasts in 202 patients resulted from our initial query, with 139 treated with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) and 67 treated with conventional radiation therapy (CRT). Median follow-up was 45 months (range, 4-210 months); patient cohorts were generally similar. Eight patients were excluded from toxicity analysis for insufficient follow-up (<2 years). Overall, reconstruction failure and major complication rates were significantly lower in the IMRT group. Reconstruction failure rates were 3.0% for IMRT versus 16.4% for CRT (P = .002), and major complication rates were 6.8% for IMRT versus 24.6% for CRT (P < .001). On univariate analysis, CRT was significantly predictive of implant failure (hazard ratio, 5.54; P = .003) and increased complication rates (hazard ratio, 3.83; P = .001). Significance persisted on multivariable analysis. Survival outcomes were similar, with no difference in 2 year overall survival (P = .12) and local recurrence (P = .41).

CONCLUSIONS

Using IMRT may improve reconstruction outcomes over CRT, with significantly lower reconstruction failure and complication rates without compromising local control or survival.

Is It All about Surface Topography? An Intra-Individual Clinical Outcome Analysis of Two Different Implant Surfaces in Breast Reconstruction

The most common long-term complication of silicone breast implants (SMI) remains capsular fibrosis. The etiology of this exaggerated implant encapsulation is multifactorial but primarily induced by the host response towards the foreign material silicone. Identified risk factors include specific implant topographies. Of note, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) has only been observed in response to textured surface implants. We hypothesize that reduction of SMI surface roughness causes less host response and, hence, better cosmetic outcomes with fewer complications for the patient. A total of 7 patients received the routinely used CPX^®4 breast expander (~60 µM Ra) and the novel SmoothSilk^® (~4 µM Ra), fixed prepectoral with a titanized mesh pocket and randomized to the left or right breast after bilateral prophylactic NSME (nipple-sparing mastectomy). We aimed to compare the postoperative outcome regarding capsule thickness, seroma formation, rippling, implant dislocation as well as comfortability and practicability. Our analysis shows that surface roughness is an influential parameter in controlling fibrotic implant encapsulation. Compared intra-individually for the first time in patients, our data confirm an improved biocompatibility with minor capsule formation around SmoothSilk^® implants with an average shell roughness of 4 µM and in addition an amplification of host response by titanized implant pockets.

The Effect of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on One- and Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction and on Autologous Reconstruction: A Multicenter Italian Study among 18 Senonetwork Breast Centres

Purpose

In modern breast cancer treatment, a growing role has been observed for breast reconstruction together with an increase in clinical indications for postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Choosing the optimum type of reconstructive technique is a clinical challenge. We therefore conducted a national multicenter study to analyze the impact of PMRT on breast reconstruction.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective case-control multicenter study on women undergoing breast reconstruction. Data were collected from 18 Italian Breast Centres and stored in a cumulative database which included the following: autologous reconstruction, direct-to-implant (DTI), and tissue expander/immediate (TE/I). For all patients, we described complications and surgical endpoints to complications such as reconstruction failure, explant, change in type of reconstruction, and reintervention.

Results

From 2001 to April 2020, 3116 patients were evaluated. The risk for any complication was significantly increased in patients receiving PMRT (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.33-2.24; p < 0.001). PMRT was associated with a significant increase in the risk of capsular contracture in the DTI and TE/I groups (aOR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.57-3.20; p < 0.001). Comparing type of procedures, the risk of failure (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.06-3.12, p=0.030), explant (aOR, 3.34; 95% CI, 3.85-7.83, p < 0.001), and severe complications (aOR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.88-3.43, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the group undergoing DTI reconstruction as compared to TE/I reconstruction.

Conclusion

Our study confirms that autologous reconstruction is the procedure least impacted by PMRT, while DTI appears to be the most impacted by PMRT, when compared with TE/I which shows a lower rate of explant and reconstruction failure. The trial is registered with NCT04783818, and the date of registration is 1 March, 2021, retrospectively registered.

Mastectomy with one-stage or two-stage reconstruction in breast cancer: analysis of early outcomes and patient's satisfaction

Aim of this study is to compare early post-operative outcomes and patient's satisfaction after skin-sparing and/or nipple-sparing mastectomy (SSM/SNSM) followed either by breast reconstruction with one-stage prepectoral implantation or two-stage technique for breast cancer (BC) or BRCA1/2 mutation.From January 2018 to December 2021, 96 patients (mean age of 51.12 ± 10.9) underwent SSM/SNSM and were divided into two groups: in group A (65 patients, 67.7%), mastectomy was followed by one-stage reconstruction; in group B (31 patients, 32.3%) by two-stage. Operative time was significantly longer in A vs. B (307.6 ± 95.7 vs. 254.4 ± 90.91; P < 0.05). Previous breast surgery was more common in B vs. A (29.0% vs. 7.7%; P < 0.05), while bilateral surgery was performed more frequently in A vs. B (40% vs. 6.5%; P = 0.001). All SSM/SNSM for BRCA1/2 mutation were followed by immediate prepectoral implantation. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of post-operative complications. At pathology, DCIS and invasive ST forms, such as multicentric/multifocal forms, were detected more frequently in B, while NST type in A (all P < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed improved post-operative satisfaction at BREAST-Q survey in Group A (P = 0.001). Encouraging oncologic outcomes after SSM/SNSM for BC enabled the improvement of breast reconstructive techniques. One-stage reconstruction is characterized by better aesthetic outcomes and by greater patient's satisfaction. When SSM/SNSM is technically difficult to perform, as in multicentric/multifocal forms or previous breast surgery, mastectomy followed by two-stage reconstruction should be considered to achieve a radical surgery.

Study on short-term cosmetic effects and quality of life after breast cancer modified radical mastectomy combined with one-stage prosthesis implantation

Background

This study investigated the reconstruction effect of skin-preserving breast cancer modified radical mastectomy combined with one-stage breast prosthesis implantation in female patients to analyze relevant factors and observe the effect of prosthesis reconstruction on short-term breast satisfaction, psycho-social functions, and quality of life (QOL) in patients with breast cancer after the operation.

Methods

Patients were divided into two groups based on the reconstruction effect (an excellent effect group and a good and general effect group). Patients' short-term cosmetic effect on the breast after breast cancer modified radical mastectomy combined with one-stage breast prosthesis implantation was prospectively followed up to analyze influencing factors. At post-operative 6 months, the breast satisfaction dimension, psycho-social dimension, upper limb breast health dimension, and surgical satisfaction dimension in the prosthesis reconstruction module in the BREAST-Q scale were used for follow-up evaluation.

Results

The excellent rate of prosthesis reconstruction was 91.3%. A significant correlation was observed among the reconstruction effect, implant volume, and number of children born by the patient (P < 0.05). The correlation with age, BMI (body mass index), operation time, nipple and areola retention, operation method, and incision was not statistically significant (P > 0.05). At post-operative 6 months, the Breast-Q score was significantly different in the overall breast satisfaction dimension and outcome satisfaction dimension between the two groups (P < 0.05).

Conclusion

Breast cancer modified radical mastectomy combined with one-stage breast prosthesis implantation can not only fulfill patients' physical aesthetic needs but also positively affect their psychosocial behavior to improve post-operative QOL.

≠Risk of breast implant removal after one- versus two-stage breast reconstructive surgery

BACKGROUND

To date, both one- and two-stage techniques are used in immediate 'implant-based breast reconstruction' (IBBR) after mastectomy. Because it is still unknown what technique offers the best clinical outcomes, a multicenter retrospective study was conducted to compare both breast reconstruction techniques.

METHODS

All patients, who underwent a mastectomy followed by immediate one- or two-stage IBBR during 2010 - 2016 were included. Our primary outcome measure was explantation of the 'tissue expander' (TE) and/ or implants within 60 days after breast reconstruction. Secondary outcomes were overall complication rate and secondary corrections.

FINDINGS

Among a total of 383 women, TE/ implant explantation rate was higher in one-stage (19.9%) than in two-stage (11.3%) treated patients (p = 0.082). Overall complication rate (35.7% and 19.9% respectively, p = 0.008) and secondary corrections (29.8% and 20.3% respectively, p = 0.156) were also higher in one-stage compared to two-stage IBBR respectively. However, explantation (OR = 1.55; 95%CI = 0.67-3.58, p = 0.301) and complication (OR = 1.85; 95%CI = 0.92-3.37, p = 0.084) rates were comparable in one- and two-stage IBBR in our stratified multivariate logistic regression analyses, when controlling for history of smoking, nipple-sparing mastectomy, neoadjuvant radiation therapy, and removed breast tissue weight. A remarkable outcome in this study is that women treated with prophylactic surgery were more likely to have an explantation of the TE/ implant after a one-stage IBBR (OR = 4.49; 95%CI = 1.10-18.3, p = 0.037) than two-stage IBBR. In contrast, no association between type of IBBR and risk of TE/implants removal was found among women with a therapeutic mastectomy (OR = 0.82; 95%CI = 0.24-2.79, p =  = 0.74).

CONCLUSION

One- and two-stage IBBR showed a comparable explantation and complication rate in our retrospective study. In one-stage IBBR more secondary corrections were detected. In addition, women who have to decide on a prophylactic mastectomy should be aware of a significantly higher risk of explantation of their implant after one-stage IBBR.

Breast Implants for Mammaplasty: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Multiple Complications

BACKGROUND

The association of breast implants and complications after mammaplasty has been extensively researched. The aim of this study is to summarize all available results in meta-analysis investigating the association between implants and the incidence of various complications.

METHODS

An umbrella review for breast implants and associated complications was performed by searching related reviews from electronic databases including Pubmed, Ovid and CINAHL. We collected and reviewed evidence across meta-analyses of observational and interventional studies of implants and any health outcome. The quality of the reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR tool (A measurement tool to assess systematic reviews).

RESULTS

The research included 92 meta-analyses of 609 studies concerning various areas. Capsular contracture was the most investigated outcome. Radiotherapy, human acellular dermal matrix application, direct-to-implant reconstruction, smooth implant, silicone-filled implant and periareolar incision were significantly associated with higher rates of some of the complications.

CONCLUSIONS

This umbrella review provides surgeons with summarized evidence of the association between the complications and implant-related factors in mammaplasty surgery to help surgeons make informed choices in the future.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

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 .

Immediate Breast Reconstruction after mastectomy with polyurethane implants versus textured implants: A retrospective study with focus on capsular contracture

BACKGROUND

Capsular contracture (CC) is the most common complication following Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR) with breast implants. Different implant surfaces were developed aiming to reduce the incidence of CC. We evaluated the incidence and degree of CC after Direct-to-Implant (DTI) IBR with insertion of textured (TE) or polyurethane (PU) covered implants.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients treated at our Institution with mastectomy and one-stage IBR and implant reconstruction between 2013 and 2018, with or without post mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT), was conducted. Immediate breast reconstruction was performed by implanting 186 PU covered implants and 172 TE implants.

RESULTS

Three-hundred-twelve women underwent 358 DTI IBR with PU or TE implants, were analyzed with a median follow-up time of 2.3 years (range 1.0-3.0). The overall rate of CC Baker grade III and IV was 11.8% (95%CI: 8.4-16.3), while, after PU and TE implant placement it was 8.1% (95% CI: 4.1-15.7) and 15.8% (95% CI: 4.1-15.7) [p = 0.009]), respectively. Irradiated breasts developed CC more frequently rather than non-irradiated breasts (HR = 12.5, p < 0.001), and the relative risk was higher in the TE group compared with the PU group (HR = 0.3, p = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

After mastectomy and one-stage IBR, the use of PU covered implants is associated with a lower incidence of CC compared to TE implants. This advantage is amplified several folds for patients who necessitate PMRT. Footnote: Capsular contracture (CC); Immediate Breast Reconstruction (IBR); Directto- Implant (DTI); Textured (TE); Polyurethane (PU); Post mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT); Nipple Sparing mastectomy (NSM).

Factors Associated With Complications in Immediate Breast Reconstruction in 1 Stage With Completely Submuscular Implants

BACKGROUND

Immediate breast reconstruction in 1 stage using permanent implants is gaining popularity and can be performed with or without the use of acellular dermal matrices. This study aimed to investigate the results of breast implants placed submuscularly without acellular dermal matrix and assess the factors affecting surgical complications.

METHODS

From November 2009 to March 2018, 138 patients underwent immediate breast reconstruction with permanent submuscular implants after concomitant skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomies in a single institution. All implants were covered with sufficient soft tissue under a submuscular pocket.

RESULTS

One hundred thirty-eight patients were enrolled, and a total of 196 breasts were operated. The average age and body mass index (BMI) of the patients were 44.9 ± 8.8 years and 23.7 ± 3.6 kg/m, respectively. The majority of the mastectomies were therapeutic (81%). The average volume of implants was 389 ± 89 mL, and the mean follow-up was 33 months. The overall complication rate was 17% (n = 23), with skin necrosis being the most common complication followed by infections. Having a BMI equal to or greater than 25 kg/m was found to be a statistically significant predictor for overall complications (P = 0.002), whereas smoking history, age, and implant volume were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate breast reconstruction in 1 stage using permanent implants can be performed with acceptable complication rates and cosmetic outcomes. Our study demonstrated that high BMI is a risk factor for overall complications. With proper patient selection and surgical technique, implants could be completely covered under a submuscular pocket.

Does 2-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Allow for a Larger Volume of the Definite Implant Compared With 1-Stage Reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION

Breast reconstruction using implants is still the main breast reconstruction technique worldwide. Current debate within implant-based breast reconstruction is whether to perform a 1-stage (direct implant) or 2-stage (tissue expander/implant) reconstruction. Volume differences between a woman's native breast and changes in volume after breast reconstruction might be an important factor for a patient's choice between these types of reconstruction. Three-dimensional imaging facilitates objective breast volume estimates. The goal of this study was to investigate differences between the patient's natural breast and the volume after completed breast reconstruction. One- and two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction techniques were compared. Finally, it was assessed whether patient satisfaction is causally related with the final breast volume after reconstruction.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A total of 38 patients were included in the study, including 35 two-stage breast reconstructions and 27 one-stage reconstructions. Preoperative and postoperative 3-dimensional images of the breast with the Vectra XT Imaging system were taken. Volume analysis was performed to estimate the patient's native breast volume. Implant size were derived from the operation report. A mean volume reduction for the 1-stage reconstruction group was found -1 mL, whereas an increase of +80 mL was found in the 2-stage reconstruction group (P < 0.005). Patient satisfaction related to volume outcome was not significantly different between both groups, using the Breast-Q questionnaire.

CONCLUSIONS

This study shows that a 2-stage breast reconstruction has the potential of an increased breast volume compared with a similar breast volume in 1-stage reconstruction.

Moffitt Cancer Center Experience of Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction: Does Acellular Dermal Matrix Increase Return to the Operating Room?

BACKGROUND

Tissue expander and implant remains the most common technique for breast reconstruction. A controversial topic within this method is routine use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM). Acellular dermal matrices have increased risks of infection, seroma, hematoma, skin flap necrosis, and total complications.

METHODS

After an institutional review board approval, a retrospective chart review was conducted of 756 tissue expander with implant cases from November 2010 to November 2016 at Moffitt Cancer Center with 2 breast reconstruction surgeons. Patients were grouped in 2 groups: tissue expander alone reconstruction (TE) and tissue expander with ADM (TE + ADM). Complications were defined by return visits to the operating room for irrigation and debridement as well as for subsequent tissue expander placement.

RESULTS

There were 703 patients in the TE group and 53 in the TE + ADM group. Patients undergoing TE + ADM reconstruction were 3 times more likely to experience return to operating room compared with patients undergoing TE alone (7.5% vs 2.4%). Patients were significantly more likely to undergo 3 or more subsequent tissue expander placement procedures with TE + ADM (54.7%) compared with TE alone (4.8%) (P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Although ADM may be appropriate for specific patients, its use in tissue expander breast reconstruction should be judiciously selected, because there is an observed increase in complications needing return to the operating room.