Search

Background: Major surgical concerns associated with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) are partial or total nipple-areola complex (NAC) loss, decreased sensation, and nipple malposition. Patient satisfaction and NAC outcomes including malposition in patients who have undergone unilateral expander-implant reconstruction after NSM as compared with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) remain unclear. Therefore, the aim of this study was to assess patient satisfaction and NAC outcomes of breast cancer patients who underwent spared or reconstructed NAC after unilateral NSM as compared with unilateral SSM.Methods: Patients who underwent immediate expander-implant breast reconstruction following unilateral NSM or SSM were included. Medical records of patients from April 2010 to February 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Reconstruction-related complications such as infection, seroma, haematoma, delayed wound healing, and reconstruction failure were recorded. NAC outcome analysis was performed using preoperative and postoperative digital photographs for each patient. Patient satisfaction with the reconstructed breast and NAC was assessed using a study-specific questionnaire.Results: Delayed wound healing occurred in 18 of 55 NSM patients and 15 of 85 SSM patients (p = 0.040). Final reconstruction failure occurred in 0 NSM patients and 6 SSM patients (p = 0.043). The mean photography analysis score of total aesthetic outcome was 13.12 ± 2.39 in the NSM group and 14.06 ± 2.75 in the SSM group (p = 0.052). The mean questionnaire score of NAC position was 2.88 ± 0.85 in the NSM group and 3.80 ± 0.84 in the SSM group (p = 0.001). The mean questionnaire score of NAC sensitivity was 2.12 ± 0.58 in the NSM group and 1.84 ± 0.46 in the SSM group (p = 0.003). Satisfaction with the reconstructed breast was similar (p = 0.913) after NSM and SSM.Conclusions: We observed no significant difference in breast reconstruction satisfaction between the NSM and SSM groups. Although overall satisfaction with breast reconstruction is high, patients in the NSM group often report dissatisfaction with nipple position. With a favourable score for NAC position, skin-sparing mastectomy followed by NAC reconstruction can be considered as a balanced alternative to NSM for properly selected patients with breast cancer.Level of Evidence III: 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction in large and ptotic breasts is challenging, often requiring skin-reducing procedures. The Wise-pattern skin-reducing mastectomy (WPSRM) technique provides reliable one-stage implant coverage using the pectoralis muscle and a de-epithelialized inferiorly based dermal flap. However, de-vascularization may result in mastectomy skin flap necrosis. We aimed to critically evaluate and isolate patients at high risk of complications using this procedure. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed consecutive patients undergoing WPSRM by the senior author from January 2008 to December 2011. Data collected included patient demographics, breast cancer staging, smoking, preoperative radiation, chemotherapy, BMI, mastectomy weight, implant size and type. We analyzed their effect on complications, revisions and failure rate. Results: Fifty-nine WPSRMs were performed in 39 patients with a minimum of 12-month follow-up. Complications occurred in 43.75% patients and 34.88% breasts. Multivariate statistical analysis revealed that age ( p = 0.093) and BMI ( p = 0.631) were not significant risk factors as opposed to previously published data. Mastectomy weight was significantly associated with major complications requiring secondary surgery (odds ratio per 100 g of breast tissue was 1.18; 95% CI 1.01-1.39; p = 0.036) as 90.5% of our complications occurred in those patients with mastectomy weight exceeding 700 g. Complications were reduced twofold when selecting a Becker adjustable implant over a silicone one for these higher mastectomy weights. Conclusion: WPSRM was found to be associated with an increased complication rate in patients with high mastectomy weights and immediate reconstruction with silicone implants. We propose an algorithm offering better patient selection for this technique in immediate 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 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy facilitates immediate one-stage reconstruction with an implant. Traditionally, an acellular dermal matrix or a muscle flap has been used because the inferolateral portion of the implant cannot be covered by the pectoralis major muscle. However, this method has drawbacks, including infection, cost, and donor-site morbidity. Therefore, we used an autologous conjoined fascial flap composed of the pectoralis major, serratus anterior, and external oblique fascia in patients with small-to-medium breasts. Methods: A series of 11 immediate breast reconstructions in 11 patients was carried out from March 2010 to June 2011. The conjoined fascial flap and smooth round implants were used in all patients. Postoperative photographs were evaluated by a blinded panel and scored on a four-point scale. Patient satisfaction was evaluated by a postoperative questionnaire that had five items designed to evaluate quality of life with the reconstruction. Results: The mean body mass index was 23.2 kg/m, follow-up period was 30.9 months, and implant volume was 286.3 cc. Regarding complications, we observed one case of partial skin flap necrosis and one case of seroma accumulation in the axilla, both of which healed with conservative care. The mean overall breast satisfaction score was 3.18 ± 0.5. Conclusions: The conjoined fascial flap is a viable alternative for immediate one-stage breast reconstruction with an implant. We recommend appropriate patient selection with a body mass index greater than 20 kg/m and small-to-medium sized nonptotic breasts. 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 . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Breast reconstruction for previously augmented patients differs from breast reconstruction for nonaugmented patients. Many surgeons regard conservation therapy as not feasible for these patients because of implant complications, whether radiotherapy-induced or not. Despite this, most authors agree that mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction is the most suitable choice, ensuring both a good cosmetic result and a low complication rate. Implant retention or removal remains a controversial topic in addition to the best available surgical technique. This study reviewed the authors' experience with immediate breast reconstruction after skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with anatomically definitive implants. Methods: The retrospective records of 12 patients were examined (group A). These patients were among 254 patients who underwent SSM or NSM for breast carcinoma. The control group comprised 12 of the 254 patients submitted to SSM or NSM (group B) who best matched the 12 patients in the studied group. All of them underwent immediate breast reconstruction, with an anatomically definitive implant placed in a submuscular-subfascial pocket. The demographic, technical, and oncologic data of the two groups were compared as well as the aesthetic outcomes using the Breast Q score. The proportion of complications, the type of implant, the axillary lymph node procedure, and the histology were compared between the two groups using Fisher's exact test. Student's t test was used to compare the scores for the procedure-specific modules of the breast Q questionnaire in the two groups. Results: A validated patient satisfaction score was obtained using the breast Q questionnaire after breast reconstruction. The demographic, technical, and oncologic characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. The previously augmented patients reported a significantly higher level of satisfaction with their breast than the control patients. The scores for the other procedure-specific modules were similar in the two groups. Conclusion: A valid immediate one-stage implant reconstruction can be obtained for previously augmented patients by placing the implant in a submuscular-subfascial pocket reinforced by the periprosthetic capsule of the previous prosthesis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Although a number of studies compare different techniques of breast reconstruction, information documenting the factors that affect breast symmetry after unilateral mastectomy and reconstruction seems to be scarce. A statistical analysis of 606 patients undergoing unilateral mastectomy and breast reconstruction performed during a 7 year period was undertaken in an endeavor to identify these factors. Patients were classified according to time of reconstruction, method of reconstruction, type of implant, and mastectomy type. Contralateral procedures included mastopexy, augmentation, and reduction mammaplasty. Delayed reconstruction more frequently required a symmetrization than an immediate reconstruction. The percentage of contralateral procedures was higher for implant reconstructions than for autologous reconstructions, and the type of mastectomy was significantly associated with the symmetrization procedure. The findings showed that non-skin-sparing mastectomy (non-SSM) needed symmetrization surgery more frequently than did SSM procedures. The data suggest a preoperative collaboration and case study between oncologic and plastic surgeons to apply, when possible, SSM with immediate implant breast reconstruction, resulting in fewer symmetrization procedures and the best aesthetic follow-up result. These factors need to be considered when mastectomy and reconstruction are planned in order to optimize the aesthetic result together with the development of breast surgery specialty units. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The C-V flap including its modifications is very popular flap used for nipple reconstruction. Methods: This report describes a refinement of the C-V flap used in nipple reconstruction for patients who previously have undergone skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Closure of the V flap donor sites is facilitated by means of designing two opposing advancement 'areolar' skin flaps. Results: Our modification ensures that no 'dog ears' remain after the donor sites of the two V flaps are closed and that all scarring remains within the skin paddle of the neo-areola without any extensions on the mastectomy skin flaps. Conclusion: Our refinement of the closure for the donor site of the C-V flap used in nipple reconstruction produces an aesthetically pleasing result without unnecessary donor-site scar extensions on the mastectomy skin flaps. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an algorithm for achieving an aesthetically pleasing nipple–areola complex in cases of skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction If the contralateral nipple was big enough and the nipple-sharing technique could be used in the future for reconstruction, we left a round skin paddle at the time of the skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate flap reconstruction. The diameter of the round skin paddle was approximately the same as the contralateral areola. For nipple reconstruction we placed the graft from the contralateral nipple in the middle of the aforementioned skin paddle. If the contralateral nipple was not sufficiently large for use as a donor, then the C-V flap was used for nipple reconstruction. In these cases we deliberately left an oval skin paddle when the skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate flap reconstruction were performed. The short diameter of the oval skin paddle was approximately the same as the diameter of the contralateral areola. The position and the height of the C-V flap were marked in order to transform the oval skin paddle to a round one when the donor site of the C-V flap was closed. Following this algorithm an optical illusion of a nipple–areola complex that is similar to the contralateral normal one is created. From our experience this algorithm can help create an aesthetically pleasing nipple–areola complex and also provides a ready pattern to our tattoing experts for the dermatography of the nipple–areola complex. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]