Objective and subjective evaluation of donor-site morbidity after nipple sharing for nipple areola reconstruction

Long-Term Maintenance of Projection of Nipples Reconstructed Using Three-Dimensionally Printed Poly-4-Hydroxybutyrate Bioabsorbable Scaffolds

BACKGROUND

For patients who are unable to undergo nipple-sparing mastectomy, reconstruction of the nipple-areola complex has been shown to promote greater satisfaction in cosmetic outcome, body image, and sexual relationships. Although a variety of techniques have been developed to optimize the shape, size, and mechanical properties of the reconstructed nipple-areola complex, maintenance of sustained nipple projection over time remains a challenge for plastic surgeons.

METHODS

Three-dimensionally printed poly-4-hydroxybutyrate (P4HB) scaffolds were designed and fabricated filled with either mechanically minced or zested patient-derived costal cartilage, designed with an internal P4HB lattice (rebar) to provide interior structure to foster tissue ingrowth, or left unfilled. All scaffolds were wrapped within a C-V flap on the dorsa of a nude rat.

RESULTS

One year after implantation, neonipple projection and diameter were well preserved in all scaffolded groups compared with nonscaffolded neonipples ( P < 0.05). Histologic analysis showed significant vascularized connective tissue ingrowth at 12 months in both empty and rebar-scaffolded neonipples and fibrovascular cartilaginous tissue formation in mechanically processed costal cartilage-filled neonipples. The internal lattice promoted more rapid tissue infiltration and scaffold degradation and best mimicked the elastic modulus of the native human nipple after 1 year in vivo. No scaffolds extruded or caused any mechanical complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Three-dimensionally printed biodegradable P4HB scaffolds maintain diameter and projection while approximating the histologic appearance and mechanical properties of native human nipples after 1 year with a minimal complication profile. These long-term preclinical data suggest that P4HB scaffolds may be readily translated for clinical application.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

The authors' unique, three-dimensionally printed P4HB scaffolds can be used to create custom nipple scaffolds that contour to any nipple shape and size, enabling the fabrication of tissue-engineered neonipples with significantly greater projection maintenance and closely approximating desired nipple biomechanical properties.

Nipple Reconstruction Using the Semilunar Flap and Omega-shaped Acellular Dermal Matrix Strut

BACKGROUND

Various operative methods exist for nipple reconstruction. Selection of an appropriate skin flap and core strut material is imperative in achieving a satisfactory outcome in nipple reconstruction. Long-term maintenance of nipple projection requires further investigation by surgeons. We propose a new technique that uses a semilunar flap and omega-shaped acellular dermal matrix (ADM).

METHODS

Total 53 nipples were reconstructed by this method. An omega-shaped ADM strut was inserted into the barrel made by a semilunar flap. The footplates of omega-shaped ADM struts were spread out under the subcutaneous tissue of the donor site of the semilunar flap to support the dome of the omega strut.

RESULTS

The mean maintenance rate of nipple projection was 95.12 ± 6.30% at 3 weeks, 80.60 ± 8.93% at 3 months, and 71.70 ± 8.67% at 6 months postoperatively when compared to the projection observed in the immediate postoperative period. Thirty-five patients (66.0%) showed a maintenance rate over 70% at 6 months post operation, with most patients (94.3%) demonstrating a maintenance rate greater than 60%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study with the omega-shaped ADM strut showed superior maintenance rates of projection when compared to other studies on that used AlloDerm^® as a core strut for nipple reconstruction. Omega-shaped struts, when made with cross-linked thick ADM, supported the skin flap quite well. We propose that our method combining the semilunar flap with an omega-shaped ADM may be a good option for nipple reconstruction. 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 ."

Guiding Nipple-Areola Complex Reconstruction: Literature Review and Proposal of a New Decision-Making Algorithm

BACKGROUND

Nipple-areola complex reconstruction (NAR) most commonly represents the finishing touch to breast reconstruction (BR). Nipple presence is particularly relevant to the patient's psyche, beyond any shadow of doubt. Many reconstructive options have been described in time. Surgery is easy, but final result is often disappointing on the long run.

METHODS

The goal of this manuscript is to analyze and classify knowledge concerning NAR techniques and the factors that influence success, and then to elaborate a practical evidence-based algorithm. Out of the 3136 available articles as of August 8th, 2020, we selected 172 manuscripts that met inclusion criteria, which we subdivided into 5 main topics of discussion, being the various NAR techniques; patient factors (including patient selection, timing and ideal position); dressings; potential complications and finally, outcomes/patient satisfaction.

RESULTS

We found 92 articles describing NAR techniques, 41 addressing patient factors (out of which 17 discussed patient selection, 14 described ideal NAC location, 10 described appropriate timing), 10 comparing dressings, 7 studying NAR complications, and 22 addressing outcomes and patient satisfaction. We elaborated a comprehensive decision-making algorithm to help narrow down the choice among NAR techniques, and choose the correct strategy according to the various scenarios, and particularly the BR technique and skin envelope.

CONCLUSIONS

No single NAR technique provides definitive results, which is why we believe there is no "end-all be-all solution". NAR must be approached as a case-by-case situation. Furthermore, despite NAR being such a widely discussed topic in scientific literature, we still found a lack of clinical trials to allow for more thorough recommendations to be elaborated.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each submission to which Evidence-Based Medicine rankings are applicable. This excludes Review Articles, Book Reviews, and manuscripts that concern Basic Science, Animal Studies, Cadaver Studies, and Experimental Studies. 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.

Nipple-Areola Complex Reconstruction

The reconstruction of the nipple–areola complex is the last step in the breast reconstruction process. Several techniques have been described over the years. The aim of this review is to provide clarity on the currently available reconstructive options.

Management of the Nipple-Areola Complex in Selected Patients Undergoing Primary Breast Reconstruction: A Comparison of Immediate Replantation and Delayed Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Management of the nipple-areola complex is an important issue in primary breast reconstruction. When nipple-sparing mastectomy is not suitable, alternatives are immediate nipple-areola complex replantation and delayed reconstruction. The aim of this study was to examine whether patients benefit more from nipple-areola complex preservation by immediate replantation or delayed nipple-areola complex reconstruction.

METHODS

Postoperative results and patient satisfaction after 54 primary breast reconstructions with immediate nipple-areola complex replantation or delayed nipple-areola complex reconstruction were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The nipple-areola complex was replanted immediately in 37 cases and reconstructed later with nipple sharing and full-thickness skin grafting in 17 cases. Compared with immediate replantation, delayed reconstruction resulted in significantly better postoperative nipple projection (P = 0.01*, Mann-Whitney U test), greater similarity of color and projection with the contralateral side and greater patient satisfaction (Breast-Q). Complete loss of projection occurred in 4 of the 37 replanted nipple-areola complexes. No complete nipple-areola complex necrosis or tumor recurrence was observed in any patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate nipple-areola complex replantation is a safe and reliable procedure for selected patients with contraindications for nipple-sparing mastectomy who have a strong desire to maintain their own nipple-areola complexes, or in bilateral cases. However, drawbacks of this procedure include loss of projection and depigmentation. Delayed reconstruction with nipple sharing and full-thickness skin grafting is a good alternative, especially in unilateral cases; it leads to better postoperative results and greater patient satisfaction, but it involves a nipple-areola complex-free period.

Two-Blade Guillotine Technique for Nipple Graft Harvest

The nipple-sharing technique for nipple reconstruction offers excellent tissue matching. The method used for nipple graft harvesting determines the quality of the graft and hence, the success of nipple sharing. Here, we described a guillotine technique wherein the nipple is first transfixed with 2 straight needles to stabilise it. Two No. 11 blades are then inserted in the center and simultaneously swept outwards to amputate the distal portion of the nipple. This technique provides good control, resulting in a very evenly cut base. The recipient bed is deepithelialized thinly, and the nipple graft is inset with interrupted 8-0 nylon sutures under magnification. Being a composite graft, it is protected with splint dressings for 6 weeks, and the dressing is regularly changed by the surgeon. The height of the nipple grafts ranges from 4 to 8 mm. This technique was performed in 9 patients with an average follow-up of 2.9 years (range, 1–4.5 years). Apposition between the nipple graft and its bed is crucial for the success of this technique. When correctly applied, we observed rapid revascularization of the graft.

Nipple-areola complex reconstruction techniques: A literature review

Many techniques for nipple-areola complex (NAC) reconstruction are described. Clarity is required on the currently available options. Since a complete list of all the techniques described until now is not available, a possibly comprehensive literature overview was carried out from 75 papers (years 1946-2015). The local flap was the most frequently described technique for the nipple reconstruction with no significant difference in complications' rate among the various types of techniques. Complications in nipple reconstruction were 46.9% after graft, 7.9% after local flap, and 5.3% in case of flaps with autologous graft/alloplastic/allograft augmentation, while complications in areola reconstruction were 10.1% after graft, and 1.6% after areola tattoo. Flaps appear to be more reliable than grafts in nipple reconstruction, while tattoo is thought to be safer than graft in areola reconstruction. The loss of projection, although considerable (45%-75%), had not significant impact on patients' satisfaction. Due to contraction, overcorrection of 25-50% of the desired result is advisory when adopting local flaps, in order to prevent loss of projection. The use of flaps with autologous graft/alloplastic/allograft augmentation (cartilage, fat, calcium hydroxylapatite, acellular dermal matrix, polymethylmethacrylate, biologic collagen) showed a minor loss of nipple projection but may expose to a relative increased number of postoperative flap necrosis.

Nipple reconstruction after implant-based breast reconstruction in radiated patients: A new safe dermal flap

INTRODUCTION

After implant-based breast reconstruction, the nipple reconstruction technique must be carefully chosen, especially in patients with a history of radiotherapy. When the contralateral nipple is not available, using a classical dermal-fat local flap may lead to the implant exposure, and consequently, removal. We describe here a simple nipple reconstruction technique, using a strictly dermal local flap and evaluate its complication rate.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

All patients who underwent our technique for nipple reconstruction between January 2012 and April 2015 were included in this retrospective study. We described our surgical technique and noted the occurrence of postoperative complications.

RESULTS

Forty-nine nipples, in 47 patients with a history of radiotherapy, were reconstructed with our technique. The mean age was 53 years old (range 27-78 years old). The average time between radiotherapy and nipple reconstruction was 42.5 months (range from 4.6 to 274.8 months). The mean follow-up was 30.9 months (range from 6 to 47 months). No implant exposure occurred. Regarding the nipple flap, two partial flap loss and one infection occurred, the whole complication rate was 6.1%. Regarding nipple projection, it was quite low (between 2 and 5 mm) after 6 months, but remained stable.

CONCLUSION

Our strictly dermal local flap technique for nipple reconstruction is a safe procedure and represents a good alternative to composite contralateral nipple graft in irradiated patients with an implant-based reconstructed breast.