A Meta-Analysis of Autologous Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction and Timing of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy

Current approaches to breast reconstruction: A scoping review of outcomes and factors influencing core outcome sets

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy among women worldwide. Surgery is part of the standard treatment for most new breast cancer patients. Surgical options include breast conserving surgery and mastectomy. Breast reconstruction is commonly offered to patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer. The aim of this review was to evaluate current approaches to breast reconstruction and factors influencing core outcome sets for breast reconstruction. This review focused to identify keywords pertaining to the review aim such as: "breast reconstruction" AND "breast cancer" AND "outcomes" through Medline. There were 49 relevant manuscripts identified between the July 2018 to July 2023. Additionally, we identified based on the literature review manuscripts on topics of oncological outcomes after breast reconstruction. Preference was given to the sources published in the last five years. Available research indicates that although general quality of life post-reconstruction is comparable across surgical methods, variations exist in postoperative satisfaction, complications, and recovery. Autologous reconstruction is often associated with higher patient satisfaction and well-being across physical, psychosocial, and aesthetic domains compared to implant-based reconstruction. Key risk factors for complications include diabetes, obesity, and smoking, which impact postoperative recovery and readmission rates. Additionally, postmastectomy radiation therapy to breast cancer management increases risks of infection, necrosis, and aesthetic dissatisfaction. However, autologous techniques are somewhat less affected of this risk than implant based techniques. The review underscores the need for enhanced patient education tools and precision-based approaches that address both aesthetic and oncological concerns, setting a foundation for more informed, data-supported decision-making in breast reconstruction.

Thoracoabdominal advancement flap for definition of inframammary fold in delayed breast reconstruction: A retrospective cohort study assessing safety and patient-reported satisfaction using the BREAST-Q

INTRODUCTION

Numerous inframammary fold reconstruction methods have been described. An update of the thoracoabdominal advancement flap technique has been proposed, enabling definition of the inframammary fold and significant skin recruitment. This study aimed to provide information on safety, patient management, and validated patient-reported outcomes, enabling a critical analysis of this technique.

METHOD

This single-centre retrospective cohort study included female patients, aged ≥18 years, with history of breast cancer treated by total mastectomy, and complete delayed breast reconstruction with thoracoabdominal advancement flap. The data collected included age, history of radiotherapy, surgical protocol, complications, reoperations of the inframammary fold, and BREAST-Q score at the end of reconstruction.

RESULTS

The 100 patients included underwent 102 delayed breast reconstructions. Reconstructive methods were deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap (n=50), muscle sparring latissimus dorsi flap (n=29), transverse myocutaneous gracilis flap (n=7), prosthesis (n=4), and adipose tissue transfers (n=12). Thoracoabdominal advancement flap was associated with 4 Clavien-Dindo Grade I complication (delayed wound healing); 42 patients underwent surgical revision of inframammary fold (IMF) placement. BREAST-Q results at the end of reconstruction were available for 63 patients; the mean±standard deviation score for Satisfaction with breast was 61.9±12.3, and for Physical well-being: chest this was 71.9±20.2.

CONCLUSION

This IMF reconstructive technique is safe, with minimal complications, and compatible with all reconstructive methods. It ensures patient satisfaction, even in irradiated areas, and respects the aesthetic subunits of the breast, maintaining a single breast scar and providing skin similar to the thorax. The multistep reconstructive protocol allows for revision that further consolidates cosmetic results.

[Autologous Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy: Consensus Report of the German-Speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM)]

Autologous postmastectomy breast reconstruction is associated with favourable long-term clinical outcomes and superior patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared with implant-based reconstruction. However, adjuvant radiotherapy has traditionally been considered a relative contraindication to immediate flap-based reconstruction due to its unpredictable effects on the reconstructive outcome. While modern adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been able to significantly reduce acute and chronic radiation-induced complications, plastic surgeons still hesitate to offer immediate autologous reconstruction to patients expected to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy. More recently, evidence has emerged suggesting a paradigm shift in favour of immediate autologous reconstruction despite subsequent radiotherapy. At the 44th Annual Meeting of the German-speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM) in Bern, Switzerland, a workshop discussed the literature on PMRT and autologous breast reconstruction, aiming to establish consensus among the participants. Several areas of agreement were identified, including the goals of postmastectomy reconstruction, specifically the creation of a soft and sensitive breast symmetrical in shape and size to the unaffected breast via the safest procedure possible. The importance of preserving the maximum amount of native breast skin envelope through skin- and nipple-sparing approaches was emphasised. Finally, a consensus was reached that PMRT should no longer be considered a contraindication to immediate autologous breast reconstruction.

Navigating the Complexities of Radiation Injuries: Therapeutic Principles and Reconstructive Strategies

Radiation injuries, particularly those resulting from therapeutic or accidental exposure, present complex challenges for medical management. These injuries can manifest localized skin damage or extend to deeper tissues, presenting as various clinical entities that require treatment strategies, ranging from conservative management to complex surgical interventions. Radiation treatment constitutes a fundamental component of neoplastic management, with nearly two out of three oncological instances undergoing it as an element of their therapeutic strategy. The therapeutic approach to radiation injury consists of expanding prophylactic measures while maintaining the efficacy of treatment, such as conservative treatment or local debridement followed by reconstruction. The armamentarium of reconstructive methods available for plastic surgeons, from secondary healing to free tissue transfer, can be successfully applied to radiation injuries. However, the unique pathophysiological changes induced by radiation necessitate a careful and specialized approach for their application, considering the altered tissue characteristics and healing dynamics. The therapeutic strategy is guided by both the severity and progression of the injury, with the primary aim of restoring functionality and aesthetic aspects while simultaneously minimizing the risk of complications. This paper explores the various conditions encompassed by the term "radiation injury," reviews both non-surgical and surgical therapeutic strategies for managing these injuries, and highlights the unique challenges associated with treating irradiated tissues within specific oncological contexts.

Delayed breast reconstruction with autologous free flap after radiation therapy: vascular complications and aesthetic outcomes

BACKGROUND

The safety and outcome of breast reconstruction after radiotherapy are controversial, and the aesthetic aspects have not been studied extensively. We compared the results of vascular anastomosis, the incidence of postoperative complications, and aesthetic appearance between patients who had and had not received radiotherapy who then had undergone delayed breast reconstruction with autologous free flaps from the abdomen, thighs, and buttocks.

METHODS

In total, 257 flaps in 241 patients were investigated; 194 and 63 flaps implanted in patients who did not receive radiotherapy and who received radiotherapy before breast reconstruction, respectively. Of the 257 flaps, 221, 20, 14, and 2 came from the abdomen, thighs, buttocks, and other anatomic locations, respectively. We evaluated aesthetic outcomes in 105 patients who had not received radiotherapy and 35 who had.

RESULTS

We found no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of vascular reanastomosis, the time required for anastomosis, or the incidence of unplanned reoperation. Complications such as flap necrosis were rare in both groups. Aesthetic outcomes were significantly better in the patients who had not received radiotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction with autologous free flaps can be performed safely in patients who have received radiotherapy, but the aesthetic result is slightly inferior to that in patients who had not received radiotherapy.

A Multi-institutional Analysis of a Textbook Outcome Among Patients Undergoing Microvascular Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Individual outcomes may not accurately reflect the quality of perioperative care. Textbook outcomes (TOs) are composite metrics that provide a comprehensive evaluation of hospital performance and surgical quality. This study aimed to investigate the prevalence and predictors of TOs in a multi-institutional cohort of patients who underwent breast reconstruction with deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flaps.

METHODS

For autologous reconstruction, a TO was previously defined as a procedure without intraoperative complications, reoperation, infection requiring intravenous antibiotics, readmission, mortality, systemic complications, operative duration ≤12 hours for bilateral and ≤10 hours for unilateral/stacked reconstruction, and length of stay (LOS) ≤5 days. We investigated associations between patient-level factors and achieving a TO using multivariable regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of 1000 patients, most (73.2%) met a TO. The most common reasons for deviation from a TO were reoperation (9.6%), prolonged operative time (9.5%), and prolonged LOS (9.2%). On univariate analysis, tobacco use, obesity, widowed/divorced marital status, and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy or bilateral reconstruction were associated with a lower likelihood of TOs (P < 0.05). After adjustment, bilateral prophylactic mastectomy (odds ratio [OR], 5.71; P = 0.029) and hormonal therapy (OR, 1.53; P = 0.050) were associated with a higher likelihood of TOs; higher body mass index (OR, 0.91; P = <0.001) was associated with a lower likelihood.

CONCLUSION

Approximately 30% of patients did not achieve a TO, and the likelihood of achieving a TO was influenced by patient and procedural factors. Future studies should investigate how this metric may be used to evaluate patient and hospital-level performance to improve the quality of care in reconstructive surgery.

Technical Variables in Lower Extremity Free Flap Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 Lower extremity free flap failure rates are higher than in other areas of the body. While prior studies assessed the effect of intraoperative technical variables, these generally investigated individual variables and did not examine relationships between the many individual technical decisions made during free tissue reconstruction. Our purpose was to investigate the effect of variation in intraoperative microsurgical techniques on flap outcomes in a diverse cohort of patients requiring lower extremity free flap coverage.

METHODS

 Consecutive patients undergoing free flap reconstruction of the lower extremity at two level 1 trauma centers from January 2002 to January 2020 were identified using Current Procedural Terminology codes, followed by a review of medical records. Information regarding demographics and comorbidities, indications, intraoperative technical details, and complications was collected. Outcomes of interest included an unplanned return to the operating room, arterial thrombosis, venous thrombosis, partial flap failure, and total flap failure. Bivariate analysis was performed.

RESULTS

 In total, 410 patients underwent 420 free tissue transfers. The median follow-up time was 17 months (interquartile ranges: 8.0-37). Total flap failure occurred in 4.9% (n = 20), partial flap failure in 5.9% (n = 24), and unplanned reoperation in 9.0% (n = 37), with arterial thrombosis in 3.2% (n = 13) and venous thrombosis in 5.4% (n = 22). Overall complications were significantly associated with recipient artery choice, with arteries other than PT and AT/DP having a higher rate (p = 0.033), and with arterial revisions (p = 0.010). Total flap failure was also associated with revision of the arterial anastomosis (p = 0.035), and partial flap failure was associated with recipient artery choice (p = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

 Many interoperative options and techniques are available when performing microvascular lower extremity reconstruction that leads to equally high success rates. However, the use of arterial inflow outside of the posterior tibial and anterior tibial arteries leads to a higher overall complication rate and partial flap failure rate. Intraoperative revision of the arterial anastomosis portends poorly for ultimate flap survival.

Visual Perception of Breast Free Flap Size Is Influenced by Radiation Changes of Surrounding Tissue

BACKGROUND

 Microsurgical reconstruction for bilateral mastectomy defects after unilateral radiation often results in asymmetry, despite both flap tissues never being radiated.

METHODS

 Photos of 16 patients who received prior radiation to one breast and underwent bilateral abdominal free flap reconstruction were taken postoperatively. Layperson and expert assessment were attained via online crowdsourcing and a panel of attending surgeons and senior residents. Stratification by interflap weight differences was done for subanalysis.

RESULTS

 A total of 399 laypersons responded, with the majority (57.3%) reporting that the radiated breast appeared smaller than the nonradiated breast. When the photos were stratified by interflap weight differences, the photos with the radiated side flap weight over 3% more than nonradiated side were significantly more likely to be perceived by laypersons as the same size (odds ratio [OR] = 2.7; p < 0.001) and of similar aesthetic (OR = 1.9; p < 0.001) when compared with photos with same-sized flaps. Of the expert responses (n = 16), the radiated side was perceived as smaller 72.3% of the time and the nonradiated side appeared more aesthetic 52.7% of the time. Contrary to layperson responses, the experts tend to report the radiated side as smaller despite varying flap weight. Interestingly, expert raters were significantly more likely to rate the flaps of equal aesthetics when the radiated side has a flap larger by 3% or more (OR = 3.6; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

 Higher aesthetic scores were noted when larger flaps were inset to the radiated envelope by both laypersons and experts, suggesting potential technical refinement in reconstructive outcomes.

Technical Tips to Reduce Implant Rippling in Staged Pre-pectoral Breast Reconstruction

INTRODUCTION

Pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) is becoming increasingly popular, permitting optimal implant positioning on the chest wall, prevention of animation deformity, and reduced patient discomfort. There are, however, concerns related to increased rates of breast implant rippling in pre-pectoral (versus submuscular) IBR, which can prompt a patient to seek revisionary surgery. The aim of this study is to identify factors that can be implemented to reduce implant rippling in the setting of pre-pectoral IBR.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted using the PubMed database to determine the rate of rippling in pre-pectoral IBR. Clinical studies in English were included. Further review was then performed to explore technical strategies associated with reduced rates of rippling in pre-pectoral two-stage breast reconstruction.

RESULTS

Implant rippling has been reported with a rate varying from 0 to 53.8% in 25 studies of pre-pectoral IBR (including both direct-to-implant and two-stage IBR). The majority of studies reviewed did not demonstrate a significant association between BMI and rippling, suggesting that other factors, likely technical and device-related, contribute to the manifestation of implant rippling. Hence, we explored whether specific technical modifications could be implemented that would reduce the risk of rippling in patients undergoing pre-pectoral IBR. Specifically, we highlight the need for close attention to expansion protocol and pocket dimension, expander fill medium and implant characteristics, and the rationale behind adjunctive procedures to reduce implant rippling.

CONCLUSION

Surgical modifications may reduce the incidence of rippling in pre-pectoral breast reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V

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 .

Trends of Autologous Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction and Safety during the Coronavirus Disease 2019 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

 Autologous free-flap breast reconstruction (ABR) is a valuable surgical option for patients following mastectomy. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has led to a myriad of factors that have affected access to care, hospital logistics, and postoperative outcomes. This study aims to identify differences in patient selection, hospital course and severity, and postoperative outcomes for patients who underwent ABR during and prior to the COVID-19 pandemic.

METHODS

 Patients undergoing ABR from the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program 2019 to 2020 database were analyzed to compare sociodemographics, hospital course, and outcomes over the first postoperative month. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors predictive of complications based on the operative year.

RESULTS

 In total, 3,770 breast free flaps were stratified into two groups based on the timing of reconstruction (prepandemic and pandemic groups). Patients with a diagnosis of disseminated cancer were significantly less likely to undergo ABR during the COVID-19 pandemic. On univariate analysis, there were no significant differences in postoperative complications between the two groups. When controlling for potentially confounding sociodemographic and clinical risk factors, the COVID-19 group was significantly more likely to undergo reoperation compared with the prepandemic group (p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

 When comparing outcomes for patients who underwent ABR prior to and during the COVID-19 pandemic, we found a significant increase in the odds of reoperation for those who had ABR during the pandemic. Debridement procedures and exploration for postoperative hemorrhage, thrombosis, or infection increased in the prepandemic group compared to the COVID-19 group. Notably, operative times decreased.

A Comparison of Postoperative Outcomes Between Immediate, Delayed Immediate, and Delayed Autologous Free Flap Breast Reconstruction: Analysis of 2010-2020 NSQIP Data

BACKGROUND

 While many factors influence decisions related to the timing between mastectomy and flap-based breast reconstruction, there is limited literature comparing postoperative complications between immediate (IBR), delayed immediate (DIBR), and delayed (DBR) reconstruction modalities. Using the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP), we sought to compare postoperative complication rates of each timing modality.

METHODS

 The NSQIP 2010-2020 database was queried for patients who underwent free flap breast reconstruction. Cases were categorized to include mastectomy performed concurrently with a free flap reconstruction, removal of a tissue expander with free flap reconstruction, and free flap reconstruction alone which are defined as IBR, DIBR, and DBR, respectively. The frequency of postoperative outcomes including surgical site infection (SSI), wound dehiscence, intraoperative transfusion, deep venous thrombosis (DVT), and return to operating room (OR) was assessed. Overall complication rates, hospital length of stay (LOS), and operative time were analyzed. Multivariable regression analysis controlling for age, race, BMI, diabetes, hypertension, ASA class, and laterality was performed.

RESULTS

 A total of 7,907 cases that underwent IBR, DIBR (n = 976), and DBR reconstruction (n = 6,713) were identified. No statistical difference in occurrence of SSIs, wound dehiscence, or DVT was identified. DIBR (9%) and DBR (11.9%) were associated with less occurrences of reoperation than IBR (13.2%, p < 0.001). Univariate and multivariate regression analysis demonstrated that DIBR and DBR were associated with a lower odds of complications and shorter operation time versus IBR. No statistically significant differences between DIBR and DBR in surgical complications, LOS, and operative time were identified.

CONCLUSION

 Awareness of overall complication rates associated with each reconstructive timing modality can be used to help guide physicians when discussing reconstructive options. Our data suggests that DIBR and DBR are associated with less overall complications than IBR. Physicians should continue to consider patients' unique circumstances when deciding upon which timing modality is appropriate.

Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2023

Background

Each year the interdisciplinary Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO), German Gynecological Oncology Group Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer.

Summary

The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation for early and metastatic breast cancer has been released in March 2023.

Key Messages

This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.

Complications, Costs, and Healthcare Resource Utilization After Staged, Delayed, and Immediate Free-Flap Breast Reconstruction: A Longitudinal, Claims-Based Analysis

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consensus detailing the optimal approach to free-flap breast reconstruction when considering immediate, delayed, or staged techniques. This study compared costs, complications, and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) across staged, delayed, and immediate free-flap breast reconstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Retrospective study using MarketScan databases to identify women who underwent mastectomies and free-flap reconstructions between 2014 and 2018. Complications, costs, and HCRU [readmission, reoperation, emergency department (ED) visits] occurring 90 days after mastectomy and 90 days after free flap were compared across immediate, delayed, and staged reconstruction.

RESULTS

Of 3310 women identified, 69.8% underwent immediate, 11.7% underwent delayed, and 18.5% underwent staged free-flap reconstruction. Staged reconstruction was associated with the highest rate (57.8% staged, 42.3% delayed, 32.0% immediate; p < 0.001) and adjusted relative risk [67% higher than immediate (95% CI: 49-87%; p < 0.001)] of surgical complications. Staged displayed the highest HCRU (staged 47.9%, delayed, 38.4%, immediate 25.2%; p < 0.001), with 16.5%, 30.7%, and 26.5% of staged patients experiencing readmission, reoperation, or ED visit, respectively. The adjusted probability of HCRU was 206% higher (95% CI: 156-266%; p < 0.001) for staged compared with immediate. Staged had the highest mean total cost (staged $106,443, delayed $80,667, immediate $76,756; p < 0.001) with regression demonstrating the adjusted mean cost for staged is 31% higher (95% CI: 23-39%; p < 0.001) when compared with immediate.

CONCLUSIONS

Staged free-flap reconstruction is associated with increased complications, costs, and HCRU, while immediate demonstrated the lowest. The potential esthetic benefits of a staged approach should be balanced with the increased risk for adverse events after surgery.

Optimal Timing of Delayed Microvascular Breast Reconstruction after Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

 The purpose of this study was to determine the optimal timing of delayed microvascular breast reconstruction after completion of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). The authors evaluated whether the timing of reconstruction after PMRT completion affects the development of major postoperative complications. We hypothesize that delayed microvascular breast reconstruction can be safely performed within 12 months of PMRT completion.

METHODS

 A retrospective chart review of microvascular, autologous breast reconstructions at Brigham and Women's Hospital from 2007 to 2019 was performed. Logistic regression analysis and marginal estimation methods were used to estimate the probability of any major complication (flap compromise requiring operative intervention, hematoma formation requiring evacuation, infection requiring readmission, and flap necrosis requiring operative debridement) occurring in 2-month intervals after PMRT. Patients were classified as having undergone reconstruction 0 to 12 months after PMRT (group 1), 12 to 18 months after PMRT (group 2), or 18 to 50 months after PMRT (group 3).

RESULTS

 A total of 303 patients were identified. All patients received postmastectomy radiation (n = 143 group 1, n = 57 group 2, n = 103 group 3). Mean follow-up time was 71.4 ± 38 months. Patients in group 1 were significantly younger and more likely to have undergone neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.05). Major complications occurred in 10% of patients. There was no significant difference in the development of major complications between the three groups (p = 0.57). Although not statistically significant, the probability of any major complication peaked 2 to 6 months after PMRT completion.

CONCLUSION

 There was no significant difference in major complications among patients who underwent delayed, microvascular breast reconstruction within versus beyond 1 year of PMRT completion. These findings suggest that delayed microvascular breast reconstruction can be safely performed beginning 6 months after PMRT completion.

Textbook outcomes in DIEP flap breast reconstruction: a Delphi study to establish consensus

PURPOSE

Composite measures, like textbook outcomes, may be superior to individual metrics when assessing hospital performance and quality of care. This study utilized a Delphi process to define a textbook outcome in DIEP flap breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A two-round Delphi survey defined: (1) A textbook outcome, (2) Exclusion criteria for a study population, and (3) Respondent opinion regarding textbook outcomes. An a priori threshold of ≥ 70% agreement among respondents established consensus among the tested statements.

RESULTS

Out of 85 invitees, 48 responded in the first round and 41 in the second. A textbook outcome was defined as one that meets the following within 90 days: (1) No intraoperative complications, (2) Operative duration ≤ 12 h for bilateral and ≤ 10 h for unilateral/stacked reconstruction, (3) No post-surgical complications requiring re-operation, (4) No surgical site infection requiring IV antibiotics, (5) No readmission, (6) No mortality, (7) No systemic complications, and (8) Length of stay < 5 days. Exclusion criteria for medical and surgical characteristics (e.g., BMI > 40, HgbA1c > 7) and case-volume cut-offs for providers (≥ 21) and institutions (≥ 44) were defined. Most agreed that textbook outcomes should be defined for complex plastic surgery procedures (75%) and utilized to gauge hospital performance for microsurgical breast reconstruction (77%).

CONCLUSION

This Delphi study identified (1) Key elements of a textbook outcome for DIEP flap breast reconstruction, (2) Exclusion criteria for future studies, and (3) Characterized surgeon opinions regarding the utility of textbook outcomes in serving as quality metric for breast reconstruction care.

A Paradigm Shift: Outcomes of Early Autologous Breast Reconstruction after Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

 Radiation creates significant challenges for breast reconstruction. There is no consensus regarding optimal timing for autologous reconstruction following radiation. This study explores clearly defined, shorter time intervals between completion of radiation and reconstruction than previously reported.

METHODS

 A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent autologous reconstruction by five microsurgeons at an academic institution from 2009 to 2020. Cohorts were selected by time elapsed between radiation and autologous reconstruction including <3 months, 3 to 6 months, 6 to 9 months, 9 to 12 months, 12 to 24 months, and >24 months. Analysis compared baseline characteristics, operative details, complications, revision rates, and BREAST-Q scores. Analysis of variance was used for continuous variables and chi-square for discrete variables.

RESULTS

 In total, 462 radiated patients underwent 717 flaps. There were 69 patients at <3 months (14.9%), 97 at 3 to 6 months (21%), 64 at 6 to 9 months (13.9%), 36 at 9 to 12 months (7.8%), 73 at 12 to 24 months (15.8%), and 123 at >24 months (26.6%). Age, time from mastectomy, and failure of primary reconstruction were higher at >24 months (p < 0.001). There was no difference between cohorts in intraoperative complications in radiated or nonradiated breasts. There was no difference in acute and late postoperative complications between cohorts. Wound-healing complications in radiated sides were lowest at <3 months and 3 to 6 months (5/69 [7.3%] and 11/97 [11.3%], respectively) compared with other groups (18.8-22.2%) but did not reach significance (p = 0.11). More fat graft revisions occurred at <3 months (p = 0.003).

CONCLUSION

 Reconstruction can be safely performed within 3 months after radiation without increases in intraoperative, acute, or late reconstructive complications.

Racial Disparities in Breast Reconstruction at a Comprehensive Cancer Center

INTRODUCTION

Breast reconstruction after a mastectomy is an important component of breast cancer care that improves the quality of life in breast cancer survivors. African American women are less likely to receive breast reconstruction than Caucasian women. The purpose of this study was to further investigate the reconstruction disparities we previously reported at a comprehensive cancer center by assessing breast reconstruction rates, patterns, and predictors by race.

METHODS

Data were obtained from women treated with definitive mastectomy between 2000 and 2012. Sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics were compared between African American and Caucasian women, and logistic regression was used to identify significant predictors of reconstruction by race.

RESULTS

African American women had significantly larger proportions of public insurance, aggressive tumors, unilateral mastectomies, and modified radical mastectomies. African American women had a significantly lower reconstruction rate (35% vs. 49%, p < 0.01) and received a larger proportion of autologous reconstruction (13% vs. 7%, p < 0.01) compared to Caucasian women. The receipt of adjuvant radiation therapy was a significant predictor of breast reconstruction in Caucasian but not African American women.

CONCLUSIONS

We identified breast reconstruction disparities in rate and type of reconstruction. These disparities may be due to racial differences in sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. The predictors of breast reconstruction varied by race, suggesting that the mechanisms underlying breast reconstruction may vary in African American women. Future research should take a target approach to examine the relative contributions of sociodemographic, tumor, and treatment determinants of the breast reconstruction disparities in African American women.

Complications of Immediate versus Delayed DIEP Reconstruction: A Meta-Analysis of Comparative Studies

Simple Summary

Although the deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) has become the most frequent autologous flap in breast reconstruction, it remains unclear whether reconstruction should be performed at the same time as the mastectomy or delayed. Therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis to offer an overview of recipient site postoperative complications and help guide practicians toward the ideal timing for breast reconstruction. A pooled analysis using the Mantel and Haenszel methods with a fixed effect model provided results as an odd ratio with a 95% confidence interval. Among most complications including hematoma, infection, fat necrosis, and flap loss, no significant differences were observed. However, delayed wound healing was significantly higher for patients who underwent delayed breast reconstruction. This paper offers evidence that both surgical timings offer similar outcomes and are, therefore, valid surgical strategies.

Abstract

Purpose: The setting regarding the ideal timing for deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP) reconstruction remains unclear. Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is performed at the same time as mastectomy, while delayed breast reconstruction (DBR) is performed at any time after mastectomy except immediately. We compared both strategies to assess whether IBR or DBR should be performed to reduce postoperative adverse events. Methods: A systematic review of PubMed, Embase, Medline, Cochrane, and Web of Science was conducted, aiming at articles comparing the recipient site outcomes of IBR versus DBR with DIEP. We used the Mantel–Haenszel method with a fixed effects model. Results were expressed as the OR with a 95% CI. Results: Two retrospective and two prospective studies were identified involving 5784 DIEPs (1744 immediate and 4040 delayed). We showed a significant difference in favor of IBR for wound healing issues (OR = 0.57, 95% CI 0.41, 0.77; p = 0.0003). However, no significant differences for hematoma, infection, fat necrosis, partial flap loss, and total flap loss rate were seen. Conclusions: Despite variability in the choice of the ideal time for breast reconstruction and outcomes reported among studies, immediate DIEP surgery appears to be a reliable setting with less delayed healing issues.

Radiotherapy and Breast Reconstruction: What Is the Ideal Timing? A Narrative Review

INTRODUCTION

Women undergoing mastectomy choose to pursue breast reconstruction (BR) in order to reduce their body image distress.Adjuvant chest wall irradiation is associated with a negative cosmetic outcome. The aim of our review was to identify the optimal timing of BR relating to radiotherapy delivery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Using Cochrane Library, Embase, PubMed, Springer, Wanfang and CNKI, we performed a non-systematic review of articles published up to August 2021.

RESULTS

There is no hard evidence in favor of immediate, delayed or 2-stage BR when post-mastectomy radiation is indicated. Immediate and 2-stage BR seem to be valid alternatives to delayed BR.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is essential in order to assess clinician and patient reported aesthetic outcomes and determine the optimal timing of BR in view of post-mastectomy radiotherapy, in breast cancer survivors.

Advantages of the Delayed-Immediate Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction: Extending the Choice

BACKGROUND

 Deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) reconstruction can be performed in an immediate (at time of mastectomy), delayed-immediate (immediate tissue expander followed by staged DIEP), or delayed timing following mastectomy. Avoiding flap radiation is a known benefit of the delayed-immediate approach. The purpose of this study is to evaluate patients who chose DIEP flap as the reconstructive method during initial consultation and compared characteristics of surgery in relation to their final reconstructive choice.

METHODS

 Consecutive patients having breast reconstruction from 2017 to 2019 were divided into three groups: immediate DIEP after mastectomy (Group I); delayed-immediate DIEP with tissue expander first followed by DIEP (Group II); and patients who initially chose delayed-immediate DIEP but later decided on implants for the second stage of reconstruction (Group III). Exclusion criteria were patients that had delayed DIEP (no immediate reconstruction) or had initially chose implant-based reconstruction.

RESULTS

 The study included 59 patients. Unilateral free flaps in Group II had shorter operative times (318 minutes) compared with Group I unilateral free flaps (488 minutes) (p = 0.024). Eleven patients (30.6%) had prophylactic mastectomies in Group I compared with none in Group II (p = 0.004). Patients who had immediate tissue expansion frequently changed their mind from DIEP to implant for second stage reconstruction frequently (52.2%).

CONCLUSION

 Delayed-immediate DIEP reconstruction has several advantages over immediate DIEP flap including shorter free flap operative times. Patients commonly alter their preference for second stage reconstruction. A patient-centered advantage of delayed-immediate reconstruction is prolonging the time for patients to make their choice for the final reconstruction.

Breast Reconstruction: Necessity for Further Standardization of the Current Surgical Techniques Attempting to Facilitate Scientific Evaluation and Select Tailored Individualized Procedures Optimizing Patient Satisfaction

Background

Various breast cancer reconstruction methods and novel surgical techniques include autologous or allogenic procedures, which can increase patient's quality of life and provide options when dealing with patients seen as challenging clinical scenarios.

Summary

Our aim was to review the current literature and present published evidence on innovative standards in whole breast reconstruction. Advances in flap monitoring or newly published data regarding neurotization in breast reconstruction, arm lymphedema management, breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma reconstruction treatment, and robotic surgery with regard to radiotherapy define innovative standards in the breast reconstruction setting. The role of meshes/acellular dermal matrix and fat grafting as well as optimal sequencing of postmastectomy radiotherapy in autologous and alloplastic breast reconstruction appear highly debatable also in expert panel meetings rendering further clinical research including RCTs imperative.

Key Messages

There is an abundance of novel available techniques, which mandate further standardization, facilitating scientific evaluation in an attempt to help surgeons select tailored procedures for each patient with the goal to promote informed decision-making in breast reconstruction.

A Comparative Analysis of Immediate and Delayed-immediate Breast Reconstruction after Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy

BACKGROUND

 Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is an important component in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer. Optimal timing of therapy in relation to autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) remains clinically debated. Herein, we comparatively analyze short- and long-term outcomes between immediate ABR (I-ABR) and delayed-immediate ABR (DI-ABR) in the setting of PMRT.

METHODS

 Adult patients undergoing ABR with PMRT were separated into cohorts based on reconstructive timeline: I-ABR or DI-ABR. The groups were propensity matched 1:1 by age, body mass index, and comorbidities. Surgical site events and long-term clinical outcomes (readmissions, reoperations, and revision procedures) were collected. Univariate analyses were completed using Pearson's chi-squared tests and Fisher's exact tests, and statistical significance was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

 One hundred and thirty-two flaps (66 in each cohort) were identified for inclusion. Patients with I-ABR were more likely to experience fat necrosis (p = 0.034) and skin necrosis (p < 0.001), require additional office visits (p < 0.001) and outpatient surgeries (p = 0.015) to manage complications, and undergo revision surgery after reconstruction (p < 0.001). DI-ABR patients, however, had a 42.4% incidence of complications following tissue expander placement prior to reconstruction, with 16.7% of patients requiring reoperation during this time. Only one patient (I-ABR) experienced flap loss due to a vascular complication.

CONCLUSION

 The complications encountered in both of these groups were not prohibitive to offering either treatment. Patients should be made aware of the specific and unique risks of these reconstruction timelines and involved throughout the entire decision-making process. Plastic surgeons should continue to strive to elucidate innovative approaches that facilitate enhanced quality of life without compromising oncologic therapy.

Influence of Triple-Negative versus Luminal A Breast Cancer Subtype on Choice of Autologous versus Implant-Based Delayed-Immediate Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

 Triple-negative (TN) and luminal A breast cancer molecular subtypes have divergent clinical and prognostic characteristics for breast cancer patients. Our study aims to compare the reconstructive choice of these two groups from the time they receive a tissue expander (TE) to the time they complete autologous or implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODS

 A total of 255 patients who underwent delayed-immediate breast reconstruction with TE placement from 2013 to 2017 diagnosed with either TN (n = 73) or luminal A (n = 182) invasive breast cancer subtype seen by two surgeons at a single institution were identified. Preference of autologous and implant-based reconstruction was analyzed, along with TE complications, race, age, body mass index (BMI), smoking, adjuvant therapy, and comorbidities.

RESULTS

 There was a significant difference in the choice of implant- or autologous-based reconstruction among these two groups (p < 0.05). A greater proportion of luminal A patients underwent implant-based reconstruction (63.47%) and a greater proportion of TN patients underwent autologous-based reconstruction (53.13%). With regard to TE outcomes, there was no significant difference between the two groups with regard to duration of TE placement by reconstructive type or TE surgical complications. Significantly, more TN patients underwent radiation therapy (p < 0.01) and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (p < 0.0001) than luminal A patients. BMI, comorbidities, radiation therapy, and overall TE complications were identified as predictive factors of patients electing for autologous reconstruction over implants.

CONCLUSION

 TN breast cancer patients mostly chose autologous-based reconstruction, while luminal A patients chose implant-based reconstruction. Both patient groups carried their TEs for similar duration with similar complication profile. Radiation therapy is likely a major factor in the decision for the type of delayed-immediate reconstruction among this population.

Breast reconstruction during the COVID-19 pandemic in resource-limited settings

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a novel, rapidly changing pandemic. It has affected specialized medical services in unprecedented ways. Surgical decision making, always the most important aspect of care has taken on an added layer of complexity in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. Therefore, recommendations for breast reconstruction during COVID-19 remain challenging and unclear. This article reviews the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and suggests potential approaches that could be considered in the absence of validated strategies in breast reconstruction.