Two-Staged Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Long-Term Outcome Study in a Young Population

Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction Using Intraoperative Fluorescence Imaging: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Limited comparability between study groups can generate significant selection and observer bias when evaluating the efficacy of the SPY system and fluorescence imaging for implant-based breast reconstruction. In this study, the authors compared the surgical outcomes and complications during the first stage of reconstruction between reconstructions evaluated intraoperatively with fluorescence imaging using the SPY system and clinical assessment using a matched analysis.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of patients undergoing total mastectomy and immediate two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with TEs from January of 2011 to December of 2020. The rate of complication, time for TE-to-implant exchange, and time to start radiotherapy were compared between groups (intraoperative fluorescence imaging versus clinical assessment) using a propensity score-matched analysis.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 198 reconstructions were evaluated. There were 99 reconstructions in each group. The median time for TE-to-implant exchange (140 days versus 185 days; P = 0.476) and time to initiate adjuvant radiotherapy (144 days versus 98 days; P = 0.199) were comparable between groups. The 30-day rate of wound-related complications (21% versus 9%; P = 0.017) and 30-day rate of wound-related unplanned interventions were significantly higher in reconstructions evaluated with clinical assessment when compared with the SPY system (16% versus 5%; P = 0.011). A higher 30-day rate of seroma (19% versus 14%; P = 0.041) and hematoma (8% versus 0%; P = 0.004) were found in reconstructions assessed intraoperatively with the SPY system.

CONCLUSIONS

After matching, reconstructions evaluated with fluorescence imaging exhibited a lower incidence of early wound-related complications when compared with clinical evaluation alone. Nonetheless, the Wise pattern for mastectomy was found to be the only independent predictor associated with early wound-related complications.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Breast reconstruction after mastectomy in patients with obesity: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Breast reconstruction in patients with obesity presents numerous challenges, both in terms of surgical technique and post-operative complication management. As breast reconstruction techniques continue to evolve, the armamentarium of reconstructive options for patients with obesity has vastly expanded. Options now include immediate or delayed, implant-based, autologous, or hybrid reconstruction. Determining the optimal breast reconstruction in this complex population requires nuanced and experienced decision-making.

Methods

A literature search was conducted to identify studies assessing breast reconstruction considerations in patients with obesity. The search was performed on PubMed and was limited to English language studies published between 1990 and 2023. Primary studies, case reports, chart reviews, and qualitative studies were included. Additional articles were identified for inclusion based on a review of references, as well as a web-based search, to identify additional studies that were not captured with the primary search strategy.

Key Content and Findings

This narrative review article summarizes the current literature available to guide surgeons in breast reconstruction in patients with obesity.

Conclusions

The advancements in oncologic surgery and breast reconstruction techniques have expanded available surgical options, including immediate or delayed implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction. Each approach has its unique advantages, disadvantages, and surgical considerations. Despite the challenges, patients with obesity can achieve favorable aesthetic outcomes through careful assessment of comorbidities and expectation management.

Wise Pattern versus Transverse Pattern Mastectomy in Two-Stage Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

The Wise pattern adapted to mastectomy incisions has become a valuable asset for breast reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts. The authors compared the time for exchange, time to initiate postmastectomy radiotherapy, and complication rates between Wise pattern and transverse incision pattern reconstructions.

METHODS

Records of patients who underwent immediate, two-stage, implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) between January of 2011 and December of 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Two cohorts were compared according to the incision pattern: Wise pattern versus transverse incision pattern. Complications were compared after propensity score matching.

RESULTS

The authors initially analyzed 393 two-stage immediate IBBRs in 239 patients [91 IBBRs (23.2%) in the Wise pattern group and 302 (76.8%) in the transverse pattern group]. Expansion time (53 days versus 50 days, P = 0.9), time for tissue expander-to-implant exchange (154 versus 175 days, P = 0.547), and time to initiate postmastectomy radiotherapy (144 days versus 126 days, P = 0.616) were not different between groups. Before propensity score matching, the 30-day rate of wound-related complications (32% versus 10%, P < 0.001) and the 30-day rate of wound complications requiring excision/débridement and closure procedures (20% versus 7%, P < 0.001) were significantly higher in the Wise pattern group. After propensity score matching, the 30-day rate of wound complications was persistently higher (25% versus 10%, P = 0.03) in the Wise pattern group.

CONCLUSIONS

The Wise pattern mastectomy independently increases the incidence of wound-related complications versus only transverse patterns during two-stage IBBR, even after propensity score matching. Delayed tissue expander placement may improve the safety profile of this procedure.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Simultaneous Fat Grafting During Tissue Expander-to-Implant Exchange: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

BACKGROUND

Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most common technique for breast reconstruction. The primary resource for correcting deformities, once patients have achieved an adequate volume with two-stage IBBR, is autologous fat grafting. We compared the surgical outcomes of simultaneous fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange (SFG + TtIE) versus no fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange (No-FGX).

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of all consecutive patients undergoing two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction with TE from January 2011 to December 2020. Propensity score matching was implemented to optimize comparability. The control group did not receive fat grafting at the time of TE-to-implant exchange.

RESULTS

After propensity score matching, 196 reconstructions were evaluated, 98 in each group. Reconstructions in the SFG + TtIE received larger implants during exchange in comparison with the No-FGX group (539 ± 135.1-cc versus 495.97 ± 148-cc, p=0.035). The mean volume of fat lipoinjected during TE-to-implant exchange in the SFG + TtIE group was 88.79 ± 41-ml. A higher proportion of reconstructions in the SFG + TtIE group underwent additional fat grafting after exchange versus the No-FGX group (19% versus 9%, p = 0.041). After propensity score matching, only the rate of fat necrosis after exchange was significantly higher in the SFG + TtIE group (10% versus 2%, p = 0.017). The rate of breast cancer recurrence (3% versus 5%, p = 1.00) was comparable between the groups.

CONCLUSION

SFG + TtIE is a safe procedure to improve the envelope of reconstructed breasts during two-stage IBBR. SFG + TtIE does not increase the rate of periprosthetic infection or wound-related complication versus no fat grafting during TE-to-implant exchange, but increases the rate of fat necrosis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III

Therapeutic study. 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.

Subpectoral versus prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction: A propensity score-matched analysis of 30-day morbidity and long-term outcomes

BACKGROUND

Approximately 80% of patients undergoing total mastectomy in the US opt for implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). A two-stage reconstruction with tissue expander (TE) remains the most common technique. Since the implementation of ADMs, a prepectoral approach has gained popularity and is becoming the standard of care. Herein, we compared the surgical and postoperative outcomes of prepectoral versus subpectoral two-stage IBBR.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed between January 2011 and December 2020. We included female patients undergoing immediate two-stage IBBR. The primary outcomes of this study were to compare the 30-day morbidity and the overall rate of complications during the first and second stages of reconstruction, and to compare the time to initiate postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Propensity score matching was implemented.

RESULTS

After matching, 154 reconstructions were analyzed, 77 in each group. The two matched groups exhibited comparable (p > 0.05) characteristics for all analyzed demographic and intraoperative independent variables. Reconstructions in the prepectoral group had a shortened median time for drain removal (13-days vs. 15-days, p = 0.001). The intraoperative expansion volumes were higher in the prepectoral group (300 ml versus 200 ml, p = 0.025). The 30-day morbidity and first- and second-stage complication rates were not significantly different between groups. The time to start postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) was not significantly different between groups (134-days versus 126.5-days, p = 0.58).

CONCLUSION

Prepectoral and subpectoral TE placement had comparable complication rates during the first and second stages of IBBR. Timing for TE-to-Implant exchange and initiation of PMRT were comparable between the two approaches.

Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in the Setting of Two-Stage Retropectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Should It be Delivered Before or After Implant Exchange? A Retrospective Analysis on 183 Patients

INTRODUCTION

Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) has a primary role in the treatment of locally advanced breast cancer; however, the most appropriate timing of irradiation in immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction (ITEBR) still remains unknown.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed on all women undergoing mastectomy and retropectoral ITEBR at Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital in Rome, Italy, between 2010 and 2019. The patients were categorized into three cohorts: patients undergoing PMRT with the tissue expander (TE) in situ, patients with PMRT delivered to the permanent implant (PI), patients who were not administered RT. Complications and failure rates were analysed and compared. Potential predictors of adverse outcomes were analysed.

RESULTS

Over 10 years, 183 patients underwent retropectoral ITEBR (55 PMRT-TE, 50 PMRT-PI, 78 no-PMRT). The three groups were well matched with respect to patient- and treatment-related factors (p > 0.05), with the exception of neoadjuvant chemotherapy and irradiation. The mean follow-up was, respectively, 4.58, 7 and 5.75 years. Radiotherapy either to the TE or to the PI was independently associated with failure and conversion to autologous procedures (p < 0.0001). Failure rate was significantly higher when TE was irradiated (p = 0.03). PMRT was associated with severe capsular contracture development (p < 0.00001), the odds being higher when irradiation was delivered after implant exchange (p = 0.04). Increased BMI was significantly associated with failure.

CONCLUSIONS

When PMRT is delivered to the TE, the risk of failure is higher (OR 2.77); when the PI is irradiated, reconstruction will more likely be affected by severe capsular contracture (OR 2.7). However, considering that the overall risk of severe capsular contracture correlated to PMRT is higher than failure, we believe that irradiation should be delivered to the TE. Performing a proper capsuloplasty at the time of implant exchange, indeed, allows to correct the deformities related to radiation-induced capsular contracture. Patients with unfavourable outcomes after TE placement and RT, instead, can be directly switched to autologous reconstruction.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

The Impact of Obesity on Plastic Surgery Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Obesity is a potential risk factor for complications in plastic surgeries. However, the data presented by primary studies are contradictory.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to summarize and clarify the divergences in the literature to provide a better understanding of the impact of obesity in different plastic surgery procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the impact of obesity on plastic surgery outcomes. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, LILACS, SciELO, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, Opengrey.eu, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. The primary outcomes assessed were surgical complications, medical complications, and reoperation rates. The secondary outcome assessed was patient satisfaction. Subgroup analysis was performed to investigate the impact of each BMI category on the outcomes.

RESULTS

Ninety-three articles were included in the qualitative synthesis, and 91 were used in the meta-analysis. Obese participants were 1.62 times more likely to present any of the primary outcomes (95% CI, 1.48-1.77; P < 0.00001). The highest increase in risk among plastic surgery types was observed in cosmetic procedures (risk ratio [RR], 1.80; 95% CI, 1.43-2.32; P < 0.00001). Compared with normal-weight participants, overweight participants presented a significantly increased RR for complications (RR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.07-1.27; P = 0.0004). Most authors found no relation between BMI and overall patient satisfaction.

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity leads to more complications and greater incidence of reoperation compared with nonobese patients undergoing plastic surgeries. However, this effect is not evident in reconstructive surgeries in areas of the body other than the breast.

The Failed Breast Implant in Postmastectomy Reconstruction: A Systematic Literature Review of Complications of Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most diagnosed malignant neoplasia of female patients worldwide in 2019. Survival has increased making it necessary to offer breast reconstructive procedures to improve quality of life and self-esteem. Implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common approach, making it necessary to quantify the associated complications.

METHODS

A systematic literature review of the PubMed, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases was performed. A total of 9608 citations were identified, and 44 studies met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Studies included reported the incidence of complications either per patient or per breast leading consequently to 2 complication rates depending on the type of reporting. A total of 14.3% of patient-related and 28.8% of breast-related complications while undergoing implant-based reconstruction were reported.Among total complications reported, 72.6% of patient-related and 48.5% of breast-related complications were classified as major complications.A total of 37.6% of patients respectively 15.1% of breasts required prosthesis explantation due to severe complications. Depending on reporting, 9.7% of patients and 4% of breasts required autologous flap reconstruction due to reconstructive failure.

CONCLUSIONS

High complication and failure rates are associated with implant-based breast reconstruction. Lacking randomized controlled trials, the choice between implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction has to be made individually for each patient.

Effect of radiotherapy on expanders and permanent implants in immediate breast reconstruction: long-term surgical and patient-reported outcomes in a large multicentre cohort

BACKGROUND

Current evidence for the effects of radiotherapy (RT) on implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is limited by short follow-up and lack of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). It is central to integrate long-term comprehensive outcome data into the preoperative decision-making process. The aim of the present study was to determine long-term surgical outcomes and PROs in relation to RT after implant-based IBR.

METHODS

This was a longitudinal cohort study of PRO data obtained in surveys conducted in 2012 and 2020 using the BREAST-Q questionnaire. All women undergoing therapeutic mastectomy and implant-based IBR between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2011 at four breast centres in Stockholm, Sweden, were identified. The endpoint was implant removal owing to surgical complications or patient preference.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 120 (range 1-171) months. After 754 IBRs in 729 women, implant removal occurred in 128 (17 per cent): 34 of 386 (8.8 per cent) in the no-RT group, 20 of 64 (31.3 per cent) in the group with previous RT, and 74 of 304 (24.3 per cent) in the postoperative RT group (P < 0.001). Implant removal was because of surgical complications in 60 instances (7.9 per cent), and patient preference in 68 (9.0 per cent). The BREAST-Q response rate was 72.2 per cent. Women with previous RT scored lower than those without RT on all scales, apart from psychosocial well-being. Women with postoperative RT scored lower only on physical well-being. No scores in the two RT groups had deteriorated between the survey time points, whereas satisfaction with breasts and overall outcome had decreased in the no-RT group.

CONCLUSION

Although RT was significantly associated with higher implant removal rates, PROs remained stable over 8 years despite irradiation.

Preoperative β-lactam antibiotic prophylaxis is superior to bacteriostatic alternatives in immediate expander-based breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Staged implant-based breast reconstruction is the most common reconstructive modality following mastectomy. Postoperative implant infections can have a significant impact on adjuvant oncologic care and reconstructive outcome. Here, we investigate the impact of β-lactam antibiotics (i.e., bactericidal) compared to alternative antibiotic agents on postoperative outcomes for implant-based breast reconstruction.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of patients who underwent immediate sub-pectoral tissue expander placement with an inferior acellular dermal matrix (ADM) sling at a single institution between May 2008 and July 2018 was performed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and complication rates were retrieved. The impact of antibiotic regimen on postoperative outcomes, including infection rate and reconstructive failure, was investigated.

RESULTS

A total of 320 patients with a mean age and BMI of 48.2 years and 25.0 kg/m² , respectively, who underwent 542 immediate breast reconstructions were included in the study. The use of a β-lactam antibiotic was protective against postoperative infection (odds ratio [OR] = 0.467, p = .046), infection requiring operative management (OR = 0.313, p = .022), and reconstructive failure (OR = 0.365, p = .028). Extended, that is, post-discharge, prophylaxis was not associated with any clinical benefit.

CONCLUSION

The use of β-lactam antibiotics for pre-/peri-operative prophylaxis is superior to alternative antibiotics with a bacteriostatic mechanism of action regarding rates of postoperative infection and reconstructive failure following immediate tissue expander-based breast reconstruction. Extended, that is, post-discharge, prophylaxis does not appear to be indicated, regardless of the antibiotic chosen.

A Novel Method of Outcome Assessment in Breast Reconstruction Surgery: Comparison of Autologous and Alloplastic Techniques Using Three-Dimensional Surface Imaging

BACKGROUND

Breast reconstruction is an important coping tool for patients undergoing a mastectomy. There are numerous surgical techniques in breast reconstruction surgery (BRS). Regardless of the technique used, creating a symmetric outcome is crucial for patients and plastic surgeons. Three-dimensional surface imaging enables surgeons and patients to assess the outcome's symmetry in BRS. To discriminate between autologous and alloplastic techniques, we analyzed both techniques using objective optical computerized symmetry analysis. Software was developed that enables clinicians to assess optical breast symmetry using three-dimensional surface imaging.

METHODS

Twenty-seven patients who had undergone autologous (n = 12) or alloplastic (n = 15) BRS received three-dimensional surface imaging. Anthropomorphic data were collected digitally using semiautomatic measurements and automatic measurements. Automatic measurements were taken using the newly developed software. To quantify symmetry, a Symmetry Index is proposed.

RESULTS

Statistical analysis revealed that there is no difference in the outcome symmetry between the two groups (t test for independent samples; p = 0.48, two-tailed).

CONCLUSION

This study's findings provide a foundation for qualitative symmetry assessment in BRS using automatized digital anthropometry. In the present trial, no difference in the outcomes' optical symmetry was detected between autologous and alloplastic approaches. Level of evidence Level IV.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .