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
|
Wu Y, Yu L, Huang M, Huang Y, Li C, Liang Y, Liang W, Qin T. Comparative complications of prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Front Oncol 2024; 14:1439293. [PMID: 39257552 PMCID: PMC11385603 DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2024.1439293] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2024] [Accepted: 08/06/2024] [Indexed: 09/12/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction This meta-analysis aims to evaluate the complications associated with prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared to subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) in patients diagnosed with breast cancer. Materials and methods A comprehensive search was performed in four databases, including Medline, Embase, Web of Science and CENTRAL, to collect literature published up until December 31, 2024. In addition, we conducted a thorough manual examination of the bibliographies of the identified papers, as well as pertinent reviews and meta-analyses. We conducted a search on three clinical trial registries, namely ClinicalTrials.gov, Controlled-trials.com, and Umin.ac.jp/ctr/index.htm. Meta-analyses were conducted on total complications, hematoma, infection, wound healing issues, necrosis, capsular contracture, rippling, animation deformity, and reoperation. Results A total of 40 studies were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with SBR, PBR significantly reduced the incidence of animated malformations (OR=0.37, 95% CI: 0.19 to 0.70, P=0.003, I ²=12%), but increased the incidence of ripples (OR=2.39, 95% CI: 1.53 to 3.72, P=0.0001, I ²=10%) and seroma (OR=1.55, 95% CI: 1.02 to 2.35, P=0.04, increasing I ²=70%). Conclusions Our findings indicate that PBR and SBR have comparable safety profiles, with similar total complication rates. Specifically, PBR is more likely to cause rippling and seroma, whereas SBR is more prone to causing animation deformity. Systematic review registration https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024565837, identifier CRD42024565837.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yongxiao Wu
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Lizhi Yu
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Miaoyan Huang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Yanping Huang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Chunyan Li
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Yiwen Liang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Weiming Liang
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| | - Tian Qin
- The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Guangxi University of Science and Technology, Liuzhou, Guangxi, China
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Clark RC, Segal R, Kordahi A, Sendek G, Alving-Trinh A, Abramson W, Sztain J, Swisher M, Gabriel RA, Gosman A, Said ET, Reid CM. An Interdisciplinary, Comprehensive Recovery Pathway Improves Microsurgical Breast Reconstruction Delivery. Ann Plast Surg 2024; 92:549-556. [PMID: 38563567 DOI: 10.1097/sap.0000000000003833] [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: 04/04/2024]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Free-flap (autologous) breast reconstruction demonstrates superiority over alloplastic approaches but is offered infrequently. Enhanced recovery protocols can address postoperative challenges, but most literature is limited to inpatient interventions and outcomes. This study describes an adoptable, longitudinally comprehensive and multidisciplinary recovery pathway for autologous reconstruction which adds to the current guidelines. The authors aimed to allow perioperative outcomes comparable to alloplastic reconstructions. METHODS All autologous Comprehensive Recovery Pathway (CRP) subjects from a single surgeon were retrospectively included. A comparator group of equal size was randomly selected from institutional subpectoral and dual-plane tissue expander patients having Enhanced Recovery After Surgery guideline-directed care. All subjects in both cohorts received preoperative paravertebral regional blocks. Operative detail, inpatient recovery, longitudinal morphine equivalents (MEs) required, and complications were compared. RESULTS Each cohort included 71 cases (99 breasts). Despite longer operations, intraoperative MEs were fewer in autologous cases ( P = 0.02). Morphine equivalents during inpatient stay were similar between cohorts, with both being discharged on median day 2. Multivariate regression demonstrated a 0.8-day increased stay for autologous subjects with additional contribution from bilateral cases, body mass index, and age ( P < 0.05). Autologous subjects were regularly discharged postoperative day 1 (17%) and postoperative day 2 (39%), with trend toward earlier discharge ( P < 0.01). Outpatient MEs were significantly fewer in autologous subjects, corresponding to a 30- to 150-mg oxycodone difference ( P < 0.01). Major complication occurred in 12.7% of autologous and 22.5% of alloplastic subjects ( P = 0.11). Flap loss occurred in 1 autologous subject versus 11 alloplastic failures ( P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS This study details partnership between the plastic surgery service, regional and acute pain anesthesia services, and dedicated nursing with longitudinal optimizations allowing perioperative outcomes improved over current literature. Patients in the CRP used fewer opioids from operation through follow-up with comparable length of stay and significantly fewer reconstructive failures than alloplastic subjects. The pathway may be quickly adopted into academic practice patterns and mitigates traditional barriers, allowing extension of autologous reconstruction offerings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Wendy Abramson
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Jacklynn Sztain
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Matthew Swisher
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | - Rodney A Gabriel
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | | | - Engy T Said
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, San Diego, CA
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Miller A, Jain NS, Wells MW, Da Lio A, Roostaeian J, Crisera C, Slack G, Tseng C, Delong M, Festekjian JH. Same-Day Discharge for Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2024; 153:683e-689e. [PMID: 37335577 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000010822] [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: 06/21/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction with tissue expanders are frequently admitted after surgery for monitoring and pain control, which introduces additional costs and risks of nosocomial infection. Same-day discharge could conserve resources, mitigate risk, and return patients home for faster recovery. The authors used large data sets to investigate the safety of same-day discharge after mastectomy with immediate postoperative expander placement. METHODS A retrospective review was performed of patients in the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database who underwent breast reconstruction using tissue expanders between 2005 and 2019. Patients were grouped based on date of discharge. Demographic information, medical comorbidities, and outcomes were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed to determine efficacy of same-day discharge and identify factors that predict safety. RESULTS Of the 14,387 included patients, 10% were discharged the same day, 70% on postoperative day 1, and 20% later than postoperative day 1. The most common complications were infection, reoperation, and readmission, which trended upward with length of stay (6.4% versus 9.3% versus 16.8%), but were statistically equivalent between same-day and next-day discharge. The complication rate for later-day discharge was statistically higher. Patients discharged later had significantly more comorbidities than same or next-day discharge counterparts. Predictors of complications included hypertension, smoking, diabetes, and obesity. CONCLUSIONS Patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate tissue expander reconstruction are usually admitted overnight. However, same-day discharge was demonstrated to have an equivalent risk of perioperative complications as next-day discharge. For the otherwise healthy patient, going home the day of surgery is a safe and cost-effective option, although the decision should be made based on the individual patient. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, III.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Amanda Miller
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Nirbhay S Jain
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Michael W Wells
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Andrew Da Lio
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Jason Roostaeian
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Christopher Crisera
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Ginger Slack
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Charles Tseng
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Michael Delong
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| | - Jaco H Festekjian
- From the Division of Plastic Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of California at Los Angeles Health System, and David Geffen School of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Kim YH, Yang YJ, Lee DW, Song SY, Lew DH, Yang EJ. Prevention of Postoperative Complications by Prepectoral versus Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2024; 153:10e-24e. [PMID: 37010460 DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000010493] [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: 04/04/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Implant-based breast reconstruction has evolved over time. However, the effects of prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) compared with those of subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR) have not been clearly defined. Therefore, this study aimed to compare the occurrence of surgical complications between PBR and SBR to determine the procedure that is effective and relatively safe. METHODS The PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases were searched for studies published until April of 2021 comparing PBR and SBR following mastectomy. Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. General information on the studies and surgical outcomes were extracted. Among 857 studies, 34 and 29 were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, respectively. Subgroup analysis was performed to clearly compare the results of patients who underwent postmastectomy radiation therapy. RESULTS Pooled results showed that prevention of capsular contracture (OR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79) and infection control (OR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.58 to 0.92) were better with PBR than with SBR. Rates of hematoma, implant loss, seroma, skin-flap necrosis, and wound dehiscence were not significantly different between PBR and SBR. PBR considerably improved postoperative pain, BREAST-Q score, and upper arm function compared with SBR. Among postmastectomy radiation therapy patients, the incidence rates of capsular contracture were significantly lower in the PBR group than in the SBR group (OR, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.05 to 0.35). CONCLUSIONS The results showed that PBR had fewer postoperative complications than SBR. The authors' meta-analysis suggests that PBR could be used as an alternative technique for breast reconstruction in appropriate patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yo-Han Kim
- From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine
| | - Yun-Jung Yang
- Department of Convergence Science, College of Medicine, Catholic Kwandong University International St. Mary's Hospital
| | - Dong-Won Lee
- From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine
| | - Seung-Yong Song
- From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine
| | - Dae-Hyun Lew
- From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine
| | - Eun-Jung Yang
- From the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Vingan PS, Kim M, Rochlin D, Allen RJ, Nelson JA. Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-Based Reconstruction: How Do We Choose? Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2023; 32:761-776. [PMID: 37714642 DOI: 10.1016/j.soc.2023.05.007] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/17/2023]
Abstract
Aspects of a patient's lifestyle, their state of health, breast size, and mastectomy skin flap quality are factors that influence the suggested plane of dissection in implant-based breast reconstruction. This article aims to review developments in prosthetic breast reconstruction and provide recommendations to help providers choose whether prepectoral or subpectoral reconstruction in the best approach for each of their patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Perri S Vingan
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Minji Kim
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Danielle Rochlin
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Robert J Allen
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA
| | - Jonas A Nelson
- Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY 10065, USA.
| |
Collapse
|