Pre-expansion before risk reducing mastectomy combined with lipomodelling to enhance results from implant based reconstruction

Comparing Nipple-sparing Mastectomy to Secondary Nipple Reconstruction: A Multi-institutional Study

OBJECTIVE

The primary aim of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes (PROs) of women who underwent immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) after receiving either: (1) nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) or (2) simple mastectomy with subsequent nipple reconstruction (SNR).

BACKGROUND

The goal of post-mastectomy breast reconstruction is to restore body image and quality-of-life after mastectomy, but removal of the nipple-areolar complex may have its own negative psychosocial consequences. NSM may have increased in popularity due to its perceived oncologic safety in many women and to reports of superior aesthetic results with this technique. Despite the increased utilization of NSM, few studies have evaluated the impact of NSM on PROs and complications in women undergoing immediate IBBR.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium study, a multicenter, prospective cohort study that recruited patients between February 2012 and July 2015. The primary aim of this study was to compare PROs as measured by BREAST-Q scores between women who underwent IBBR after NSM versus SNR. The secondary aim was to compare complication rates. Mixed-effects regression models controlled for demographic and clinical covariates.

RESULTS

Of the 600 women in the study, 286 (47.7%) underwent NSM. After controlling for baseline patient characteristics, we found no significant differences in satisfaction with breast, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being or sexual well-being between women undergoing NSM versus SNR. Mastectomy type was not a significant predictor of complications or reconstructive failure.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite reports of superior aesthetics for NSM over simple mastectomy with nipple reconstruction in immediate IBBR, we found no significant differences at 2 years after reconstruction in patient satisfaction, quality-of-life, or complication rates.

[New surgical strategy in breast reconstruction with implants for bilateral prophylactic mastectomies with BRCA gene mutation]

BACKGROUND

For the past decades, number of prophylactic bilateral mastectomies using reconstruction with implants increases. We describe a new surgical strategy and analyse its safety and feasability.

METHOD

It is a retrospective, descriptive and monocentric study. The first step of surgery consisted in obteining a peri-prosthetic capsule with implants and if there was a mammary hypertrophy and/or ptosis, it was corrected at the same time. The second step of surgery was the nipple-sparing mastectomy with change of implants for bigger ones. Third step consisted in a lipofilling.

RESULTS

Seven patients were included. 6 women had a BRCA1 gene mutation. Mean age was 35.6 year-old [29.6; 41.6], mean BMI was 23.8kg/m² [20.6; 27], mean chest circumference was 93.7cm [87.4; 100], mean cup was C- [B-; D-]. 4 women had mammary hypertrophy and/or ptosis. Mean number of procedure per woman was 3.6 [2.5; 4.7]. Mean volume of implants used at the first step was 248.6ml [211.3; 285.9]. The second step was performed mean 33.9 weeks [22.3; 45.5] later. Mean increase of implants volume was 120ml [80.4; 159.6]. 4 patients had complications including 1 who had implant exposure. Six patients had lipofilling of mean volume per breast of 175ml [116; 234].

CONCLUSION

This new strategy could decrease complication rate, improve aesthetic outcome and decrease psychological impact of surgery.

Novel Approach for Risk-Reducing Mastectomy: First-Stage Implant Placement and Subsequent Second-Stage Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Risk-reducing mastectomy with tissue expander and then implant-based breast reconstruction conventionally involved immediate submuscular placement of tissue expanders during mastectomy and then, after expansion, replacement of expanders for permanent implants in a second-stage operation. Use of acellular dermal matrix can achieve a single-stage operation; however, acellular dermal matrices are costly and may have potential complications. The authors aim to assess the feasibility of placement of implants as a first-stage procedure before risk-reducing mastectomy as a novel technique of reconstruction that avoids the need for serial outpatient expansion and acellular dermal matrix.

METHODS

Patients for whom risk-reducing mastectomy was planned were offered first-stage dual-plane placement of fixed volume silicone gel permanent implants by means of inframammary fold incisions. Risk-reducing mastectomy was undertaken several months later as the second operation, leaving the implants in place protected by the muscle and capsule pocket. Nipples were preserved or reconstructed according to the patient's choice.

RESULTS

Eight patients with 15 operated breasts were recruited. Anatomically shaped implants were used in all patients, and complete coverage of each implant was achieved. Mean implant volume was 433 ml (range, 290 to 545 ml). There were no complications, and good aesthetic outcomes were achieved.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-principle study finds that placement of implants before risk-reducing mastectomy is a novel technique for women at high breast cancer risk that could reduce the use of tissue expanders and acellular dermal matrices and their associated problems. Two-stage risk-reducing mastectomy with first-stage implant placement and subsequent risk-reducing mastectomy leaving the implants in place is feasible, with no complications, and can produce a good cosmetic outcome.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, IV.

Prophylactic Surgery: For Whom, When and How?

Risk-reducing surgery has proved to be a reasonable procedure in healthy women with a definitely elevated risk of developing cancer. Here we consider the elevated risk of breast and ovarian cancer. There is a clear indication for such surgery in healthy women with a pathogenic BRCA1/2 mutation. For these patients, a risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy leads to a verifiable reduction in mortality from breast cancer, particularly for young patients. In most cases, surgery is combined with breast reconstruction. The pros and cons of surgical treatment and the different surgical techniques have to be explained to and carefully considered with the patient. As yet, no unequivocal data for the benefits of intensifying early detection have been ascertained with respect to mortality from breast carcinoma. In index patients with a BRCA mutation, the surgical treatment should depend on the prognosis of the primary disease. A lower age at onset and a better prognosis of the primary disease make a contralateral mastectomy (CPM) more reasonable. In the case of BRCA mutation-related cancer, a reduction of mortality through CPM has been proven. A risk-reducing adnexectomy is basically recommended for BRCA mutation carriers. Healthy premenopausal women need a subsequent hormone replacement therapy. The prognosis of the patients is dominated by the ovarian carcinoma. This can be prevented by risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy in 95% of the cases.