Post-mastectomy sensory recovery and restoration

Breast sensibility after reconstruction: Comparison of different methods

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sensibility of the breast area is a key factor in quality-of-life evaluation after breast reconstruction (BR). Breast sensation can be assessed using numerous tools that are already largely described in the literature, including the Semmes Weinstein filaments which remain the most frequently used. Although different reconstruction techniques are available, post-BR sensitivity is rarely described. The aim of this study was to evaluate post-BR sensibility of the breast according to each reconstruction technique.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Fifteen patients were included in each group, i.e. 90 patients in total: before BR, Latissimus Dorsi (LD) flap with implant, LD flap with fat grafting, exclusive fat grafting, Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator (DIEP) flap, implant. A single evaluator assessed the sensibility with Semmes Weinstein filaments testing 7 zones on both sides. The native breast was considered as control. Various potential confounding factors were collected.

RESULTS

Patients who benefited from BR with fat grafting alone had a significantly better sensation of the reconstructed breast compared to the other groups (DIEP flap (P<0.0001), LD flap+implant (P=0.0013), LD flap with fat grafting (P=0.0073), implant (P=0.00315)). Comparing those results to the ones obtained in the group before reconstruction, only the fat grafting and DIEP flap groups showed a difference, the fat grafting group (P=0.0061) had higher sensibility whereas DIEP flaps were less sensitive (P=0.00233).

CONCLUSION

We compared mammary sensibility depending on the BR technique used. Our study is the first comparing breast sensitivity among all major breast reconstruction methods. Fat grafting resulted in better breast sensitivity in delayed breast reconstruction than implant or flap-based BR.

Intercostal Nerve Transfer as a Novel Technique for Sensation Preservation in Gender-affirming Subcutaneous Mastectomy

Chest-wall contouring surgery is an important step in the transitional journey of many transgender individuals who choose to undergo masculinization procedures. Traditional gender-affirming chest surgery does not include reinnervation of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) or the mastectomy skin flaps and risks partial or complete denervation of these areas. Efforts to restore sensation have emerged leading to various sensory nerve transfer techniques including direct neurorrhaphy to the repositioned NAC or to underlying dermatosensory elements. Here, we describe a novel technique in which we perform a nerve transfer from the anterior lateral branch of the fourth intercostal nerve (of the breast parenchyma to be resected) to the anterior lateral branch of the third or second intercostal nerve in the mastectomy skin flap. There has been no increased risk of complications, and results so far are promising. As we continue to collect long-term outcome data, the effectiveness of NAC reinnervation using this technique will be presented in a forthcoming publication.

Innervated breast reconstruction: a narrative review of neurotization techniques and outcomes

Background and Objective

While significant sensation recovery improvements in neurotized breasts following reconstruction have been reported, sensation testing methods and surgical techniques have been widely variable. This narrative review aims to summarize available literature on current neurotization practices and sensory recovery outcomes in patients undergoing innervated breast reconstruction.

Methods

A comprehensive literature search of PubMed Medline, Web of Science, and Embase was conducted to identify all studies reporting outcomes of neurotization in breast reconstruction surgeries. Data analyzed included operative times, neurotization techniques, sensory outcomes, and methods as well as patient reported outcomes.

Key Content and Findings

Despite the heterogeneity of various studies reviewed, all forms of neurotization achieved earlier and superior sensory recovery throughout the reconstructed breast skin compared to non-innervated breasts. In absence of randomized controlled trials or high-quality comparative studies, further evidence is required to objectively confirm this technique offers better sensory recovery.

Conclusions

Neurotization at the time of breast reconstruction may lead to improved sensation and patient reported outcomes delineating improved quality of life compared to non-innervated breasts. Future studies need to standardize the way that breast sensation is measured and determine pre-operative variables leading to expected changes in final sensation recovery to help manage surgical outcome expectations of both the surgeon and the patient.

Breast-Q sensory outcomes of non-neurotized, autologous, unilateral breast reconstruction with a minimum of 3-year follow-up

INTRODUCTION

Sensory reinnervation of autologous breast tissue after free flap reconstruction is highly variable. There is no long-term follow-up data exploring spontaneous reinnervation and how this affects patients' quality of life nor the nerve-related symptoms they experience. To address this issue, we invited patients with a minimum of 3 years after non-neurotized, free flap breast reconstruction to complete patient-reported outcome measures exploring sensation, quality of life and breast-related symptoms.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients undergoing unilateral Muscle-Sparing Transverse Rectus Abdominus Muscle (MS-TRAM) or deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction between 01-01-2015 and 31-12-2019 in the Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery at Manchester University NHS Foundation Trust. We invited participants to complete the recently developed Breast-Q© Breast Sensation Module.

RESULTS

All patients had undergone unilateral immediate (n = 85) or delayed (n = 82) breast reconstruction after mastectomy using either a free DIEP (n = 150) or TRAM (n = 17) flap reconstruction a minimum of 3 years prior. The median age at operation was 48. Sensation after reconstruction was significantly reduced in the reconstructed breast compared with the contralateral breast (P < 0.0001) with a reduction in reported quality of life (immediate (68.0 [54.0, 89.0]) and delayed (68.0 [62.0, 83.8])). The sensation was significantly better in immediate vs delayed procedures (P = 0.024). Sensory scores after reconstruction increased with age (P = 0.036).

DISCUSSION

Breast sensation after non-neurotized reconstruction with autologous tissue is significantly reduced at long-term follow-up with a reduction in quality of life. A minimum outcome set for quantification of breast sensation is required and future research into the cost-benefit of neurotized, autologous breast reconstruction is needed.

Sensory recovery and the role of innervated flaps in autologous breast reconstruction-a narrative review

Background and Objective

Continuing (micro)surgical developments result in satisfactory aesthetic outcomes after autologous breast reconstruction. However, sensation recovers poorly and remains a source of dissatisfaction and potential harm. Sensory nerve coaptation is a promising technique to improve sensation in the reconstructed breast.

Methods

In this literature review an overview of current knowledge about sensory recovery in autologous breast reconstruction and the role of innervated flaps is presented. A thorough PubMed search was conducted, using the terms "autologous breast reconstruction", "innervated" and "sensation".

Key Content and Findings

The breast skin is predominantly innervated by the second until sixth intercostal nerve. Some nerves can occasionally be spared during mastectomy, especially during nipple-sparing mastectomy, but transection of sensory nerves is inevitable and leads to impaired sensation. Besides unpleasant, this is unanticipated by patients and negatively influences quality of life. Coaptation between the third anterior intercostal nerve and a sensory nerve from the donor site improves sensory recovery. The donor site and nerve vary, depending on the flap type chosen. The sensory nerves from the commonly used abdominal DIEP flap originate from the 7th until 12th thoracic spinal nerves. Non-abdominal flaps, including the back, buttocks, or thigh area, can also be accompanied with a sensory nerve. Nerve coaptation can be performed directly, or by using grafts or conduits to obtain tensionless repair if necessary. It can be utilized in both immediate as well as delayed autologous breast reconstruction. No adverse outcomes of nerve coaptation have been described. And, most importantly: improved sensory recovery improves patient satisfaction and quality of life.

Conclusions

Restoring sensation is, besides restoring aesthetic appearance, an important goal in breast reconstruction. Current evidence unambiguously demonstrates superiority of innervated flaps compared to non-innervated flaps. Sensory recovery initiates earlier and it approaches normal sensation more closely in innervated flaps, without associated risks or extensive increase in operating time. This improves patient satisfaction and quality of life. It is, therefore, a valuable addition to autologous breast reconstruction. These findings encourage implementation of sensory nerve coaptation in standard clinical care.

Modern Approaches to Breast Neurotization

Absent or diminished breast sensation is a persistent problem for many postmastectomy patients. Breast neurotization is an opportunity to improve sensory outcomes, which are poor and unpredictable if left to chance. Several techniques for autologous and implant reconstruction have been described with successful clinical and patient-reported outcomes. Neurotization is a safe procedure with minimal risk for morbidity and it presents a fantastic avenue for future research.

Functional and Psychosocial Outcomes following Innervated Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

With the incidence of breast cancer, breast cancer survival rates, and prophylactic mastectomies all increasing, efforts to optimize breast reconstruction and improve quality of life are becoming increasingly important. Nerve coaptation has been investigated for its potential to remedy the clinical and psychosocial deficits in newly reconstructed breasts. The purpose of this review is to gauge the efficacy of nerve coaptation during breast reconstruction in creating worthwhile benefits in both objective and subjective dimensions of sensation.

METHODS

A Prospero registered systematic review was conducted. Databases including PubMed, SCOPUS, and ScienceDirect were screened using search terms "innervation," "breast reconstruction," and "neurotization" and relevant inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Twenty-three studies were found that met parameters for inclusion. We identified studies that assessed DIEP-based reconstruction (7), TRAM-based reconstruction (9), implant-based reconstruction (2), and five studies that looked at a variety of reconstructive modalities. Monofilament testing was the most common modality used to assess sensation, while pain, temperature, and pressure thresholds were assessed more infrequently. Various tools were used to measure psychosocial impacts, including the BREAST-Q. While the methods for evaluation of both aspects of sensation were heterogenous, there was a trend towards improved outcomes with neurotization.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this review show promising improvements in clinical and psychosocial outcomes in innervated breasts compared to non-innervated breasts. However, the heterogeneity of studies in the literature indicates that more multi-center studies with standardized methodology including the BREAST-Q, sensory testing and complication analysis are needed to adequately demonstrate the value of neurotization in breast reconstruction.

The Assessment of Nipple Areola Complex Sensation with Semmes-Weinstein Monofilaments-Normative Values and Its Covariates

Objective: To establish normative data for nipple-areola complex (NAC) sensibility examined with Semmes-Weinstein monofilament test (SWMT) and two-point discrimination (TPD) in women with varying breast sizes, including women with gigantomastia. We also aimed to identify clinical variables influencing NAC sensation. Methods: A total of 320 breasts in 160 Caucasian women (mean age 33.6 years, SD 11 years) were examined (including 50 hypertrophic breasts). NACs sensation was examined using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments (SWM) and the Weber Two-Point Discrimination Test. Results: The nipple appeared to be the most sensitive part of NAC. In normal-sized breasts, sensation thresholds (SWM) correlated with: age, BMI, history of births, breast size and ptosis (for all locations), breastfeeding history (for nipple and upper areola) and areola diameter (for all locations apart from the nipple). Regression analysis showed that age, cup size and suprasternal notch-to-nipple distance are risk factors for diminished NAC sensation. Sensation thresholds in all NAC locations of hypertrophic breasts were significantly higher compared to normal-sized breasts, while TPD tests did not differ between the groups. Conclusions: We provided normative values of NAC sensation (tactile threshold and TPD) for different NAC areas. Our investigation indicated that SWM are useful diagnostic tools when the following factors are considered while examining NAC sensation: location (nipple vs. areola), age, breast size, suprasternal notch-to-nipple distance, history of births and breastfeeding. Hypertrophic breasts presented significantly higher sensation thresholds for all NAC locations. The report may serve as a reference data for further investigations regarding NAC sensation after different breast surgeries.