1
|
Zhong T, Fletcher GG, Brackstone M, Frank SG, Hanrahan R, Miragias V, Stevens C, Vesprini D, Vito A, Wright FC. Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in Patients with Non-Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review. Curr Oncol 2025; 32:231. [PMID: 40277787 PMCID: PMC12025830 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol32040231] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/04/2025] [Revised: 04/09/2025] [Accepted: 04/11/2025] [Indexed: 04/26/2025] Open
Abstract
Breast reconstruction after mastectomy improves the quality of life for many patients with breast cancer. There is uncertainty regarding eligibility criteria for reconstruction, timing (immediate or delayed-with or without radiotherapy), outcomes of nipple-sparing compared to skin-sparing mastectomy, selection criteria and surgical factors influencing outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy, prepectoral versus subpectoral implants, use of acellular dermal matrix, and use of autologous fat grafting. We conducted a systematic review of these topics to be used as the evidence base for an updated clinical practice guideline on breast reconstruction for Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario). The protocol was registered on PROSPERO, CRD42023409083. Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases were searched until August 2024, and 229 primary studies met the inclusion criteria. Most studies were retrospective non-randomized comparative studies; 5 randomized controlled trials were included. Results suggest nipple-sparing mastectomy is oncologically safe, provided there is no clinical, radiological, or pathological indication of nipple-areolar complex involvement. Surgical factors, including incision location, may affect rates of complications such as necrosis. Both immediate and delayed reconstruction have similar long-term outcomes; however, immediate reconstruction may result in better short to medium-term quality of life. Evidence on whether radiotherapy should modify the timing of initial reconstruction or expander-implant exchange was very limited; studies delayed reconstruction after radiotherapy by at least 3 months and, more commonly, at least 6 months to avoid the period of acute radiation injury. Radiation after immediate reconstruction is a reasonable option. Surgical complications are similar between prepectoral and dual-plane or subpectoral reconstruction; prepectoral placement may give a better quality of life due to lower rates of long-term complications such as pain and animation deformity. Autologous fat grafting was found to be oncologically safe; its use may improve quality of life and aesthetic results.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Toni Zhong
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University Health Network, Toronto, ON M5G 2C4, Canada
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada;
| | - Glenn G. Fletcher
- Program in Evidence-Based Care, Department of Oncology, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8V 5C2, Canada;
| | - Muriel Brackstone
- Department of Surgery, London Regional Cancer Program, London, ON N6A 5W9, Canada;
- Departments of Surgery and of Oncology, University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6A 5W9, Canada
| | - Simon G. Frank
- Department of Surgery, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada;
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1Y 4E9, Canada
| | - Renee Hanrahan
- Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada;
- Department of Surgery, Royal Victoria Regional Health Care Centre, Barrie, ON L4M 6M2, Canada
- Department of Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON L8S 1C7, Canada
| | | | - Christiaan Stevens
- Radiation Treatment Program, Royal Victoria Hospital, Barrie, ON L4M 6M2, Canada;
- Departments of Radiation Oncology and of Family and Community Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada
| | - Danny Vesprini
- Department of Radiation Oncology, Odette Cancer Centre, Sunnybrook Hospital, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada;
- Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada
| | - Alyssa Vito
- Patient Representative, Port Perry, ON, Canada;
| | - Frances C. Wright
- Department of Surgery, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON M4N 3M5, Canada;
- Departments of Surgery and of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON M5T 1P5, Canada
- Surgical Oncology Program, Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario), Toronto, ON M5G 2L3, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Kim DK, Aschen SZ, Rohde CH. When a Good Flap Turns Bad: A Temporal Predictive Model for Free Flap Complications. J Reconstr Microsurg 2024; 40:694-706. [PMID: 38547909 DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1782671] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/10/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Microsurgical cases are complex plastic surgery procedures with a significant risk of acute postoperative complications. In this study, we use a large-scale database to investigate the temporal progression of complications after microsurgical procedures and the risk imparted by acute postoperative complications on subsequent reconstructive outcomes. METHODS Microsurgery cases were extracted from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Postoperative complications were collected for 30 days after surgery and stratified into four temporal periods (postoperative days [PODs] 0-6, 7-13, 14-20, 21-30). Postoperative complication occurrences were incorporated into a weighted multivariate logistic regression model to identify significant predictors of adverse outcomes (p < 0.05). Separately, a regression model was calculated for the time between index operation and reoperation and additional complications. RESULTS The final cohort comprised 19,517 patients, 6,140 (31.5%) of which experienced at least one complication in the first 30 days after surgery. The occurrence of prior complications in the postoperative period was a significant predictor of future adverse outcomes following the initial week after surgery (p < 0.001). Upon predictive analysis, overall model performance was highest in PODs 7 to 13 (71.1% accuracy and the area under a receiver operating characteristic curve 0.684); 2,578 (13.2%) patients underwent at least one reoperation within the first 2 weeks after surgery. The indication for reoperation (p < 0.001) and number of days since surgery (p = 0.0038) were significant predictors of future complications after reoperation. CONCLUSION Prior occurrence of complications in an earlier postoperative week, as well as timing and nature of reoperation, were shown to be significant predictors of future complications.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Dylan K Kim
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Seth Z Aschen
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York
| | - Christine H Rohde
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Columbia University Irving Medical Center, New York, New York
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Garoosi K, Yoon Y, Winocour J, Mathes DW, Kaoutzanis C. The Effects of Body Mass Index on Postoperative Complications in Patients Undergoing Autologous Free Flap Breast Reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 2024; 40:601-610. [PMID: 38395056 DOI: 10.1055/s-0044-1780518] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/25/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The prevalence of obesity in the United States exceeds 40%, yet perioperative effects of higher body mass index (BMI) in autologous breast reconstruction remain poorly studied. The purpose of this study was to investigate BMI's impact on postop complications in abdominal and gluteal-based autologous breast reconstruction. METHODS We conducted a retrospective study using TriNetX, a health care database containing de-identified data from more than 250 million patients. Patients undergoing autologous breast reconstruction were identified by Current Procedural Terminology codes. Four cohorts were established by BMI class: <24.99, 25 to 29.99, 30 to 34.99, and 35 to 39.99 kg/m2. Outcomes of interest were defined by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision (ICD-10) codes. A two-sample t-test was performed to compare incidence of postoperative complications between cohorts within 3 months of surgery. Patients with a BMI < 24.99 kg/m2 served as the control. Cohorts were balanced on age, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS We identified 8,791 patients who underwent autologous breast reconstruction. Of those, 1,143 had a BMI < 24.99 kg/m2, 1,867 had a BMI of 25 to 29.99 kg/m2, 1,396 had a BMI of 30 to 34.99 kg/m2, and 559 had a BMI of 35 to 39.99 kg/m2. Patients with a BMI of 25 to 29.99 kg/m2 had a significantly increased risk of cellulitis. Patients with a BMI of 30 to 34.99 and 35 to 39.99 kg/m2 had a significantly increased risk of cellulitis, surgical site infection, need for debridement, wound dehiscence, and flap failure. CONCLUSION Our study illustrates that there is an increased risk of postoperative complications associated with higher BMI classes. Understanding these data are imperative for providers to adequately stratify patients and guide the procedural decision-making.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kassra Garoosi
- School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - YooJin Yoon
- School of Medicine, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Julian Winocour
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - David W Mathes
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| | - Christodoulos Kaoutzanis
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, University of Colorado Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Knoedler S, Kauke-Navarro M, Knoedler L, Friedrich S, Ayyala HS, Haug V, Didzun O, Hundeshagen G, Bigdeli A, Kneser U, Machens HG, Pomahac B, Orgill DP, Broer PN, Panayi AC. The significance of timing in breast reconstruction after mastectomy: An ACS-NSQIP analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2024; 89:40-50. [PMID: 38134626 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.11.049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 13.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/05/2023] [Revised: 11/26/2023] [Accepted: 11/27/2023] [Indexed: 12/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND A variety of breast reconstruction (BR) options are available. The significance of timing on outcomes remains debated. This study aims to compare complications in breast cancer patients undergoing implant-based and autologous BR immediately after mastectomy or at a delayed time point. METHODS We reviewed the ACS-NSQIP database (2008-2021) to identify all female patients who underwent BR for oncological purposes. Outcomes were stratified by technique (implant-based versus autologous) and timing (immediate versus delayed), and included 30-day mortality, reoperation, (unplanned) readmission, and surgical and medical complications. RESULTS A total of 21,560 patients were included: 11,237 (52%) implant-based (9791/87% immediate, 1446/13% delayed) and 10,323 (48%) autologous (8378/81% immediate, 1945/19% delayed). Complications occurred in 3666 (17%) patients (implant-based: n = 1112/11% immediate, n = 64/4.4% delayed cohorts; Autologous: n = 2073/25% immediate, n = 417/21% delayed cohorts). In propensity score weighting (PSW) analyses, immediate BR was associated with significantly more complications than delayed BR (p < 0.0001). This was the case for both implant-based and autologous BR, with a greater difference between the two time points noted in implant-based. Confounder-adjusted multivariable analyses confirmed these results. CONCLUSION At the 30-day time point, delayed BR is associated with significantly lower complication rates than immediate BR, in both the implant-based and autologous cohorts. These findings are not a blanket recommendation in favor of immediate and/or delayed BR. Instead, our insights may guide surgeons and patients in decision-making and help refine patients' eligibility in a case-by-case workup.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samuel Knoedler
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany; Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Martin Kauke-Navarro
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Leonard Knoedler
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Sarah Friedrich
- Department of Mathematical Statistics and Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, University of Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Haripriya S Ayyala
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Valentin Haug
- Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Oliver Didzun
- Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Gabriel Hundeshagen
- Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Amir Bigdeli
- Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Ulrich Kneser
- Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany
| | - Hans-Guenther Machens
- Department of Plastic Surgery and Hand Surgery, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Bohdan Pomahac
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Dennis P Orgill
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| | - P Niclas Broer
- Department of Plastic, Reconstructive, Hand and Burn Surgery, Bogenhausen Academic Teaching Hospital Munich, Munich, Germany.
| | - Adriana C Panayi
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA; Department of Hand, Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Microsurgery, Burn Trauma Center, Ludwigshafen, University of Heidelberg, Ludwigshafen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|