Surgical techniques, biomaterials, and patient variables that impact peri-operative nipple necrosis in nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

152 Background: Nipple sparing mastectomy is for treatment of early stage breast cancer and risk reduction in patients at high risk for breast cancer. A high rate of nipple loss after NSM (10% to 30%) has slowed incorporation of NSM into clinical practice. No study has evaluated whether clinical and technical factors contribute to nipple loss by decreasing blood supply to the nipple areola complex (NAC). The objective here was to determine the impact of patient variables and surgical factors on survival of the nipple following NSM and to compare rates of complications of NSM to those of SSM. Methods: We evaluated 233 cases of immediate breast reconstruction following mastectomy at MD Anderson Cancer Center between September 2003 and May 2011. 113 NSM procedures were randomly matched to 120 SSMs based on stage, comorbidities, and age. The NSM group was analyzed for variables that correlated with partial or total nipple loss. Results: In the NSM group, the complication rate was 28%, compared to 27% in SSM (p > 0.99). The nipple loss rate in NSM was 20%. In SSM, axillary node dissection increased complications compared to sentinel lymph node biopsy (p = 0.01). Body mass index, breast ptosis, breast cancer pathology, distance of the lesion to the NAC and use of neoadjuvant chemo or radiation therapy had no effect on nipple loss. Vascular comorbidities and smoking lead to increased nipple loss, with borderline p values (p = 0.09 and p = 0.08, respectively). When compared to A- and B-cup breasts, larger breasts had higher nipple loss (6% and 34%, respectively; p=0.003). Surgical incision location did not affect nipple loss, neither did number of prior NSM procedures performed by the breast surgeon (p = 0.86). Axillary lymphadenectomy (p = 0.13), separate axillary incision (p = 0.25), type of breast reconstruction (p = 0.23), and application of bioprosthetic sling (p = 0.27) may have impacted nipple loss if a larger sample size was studied. Conclusions: Patient variables and surgical technique can alter the rate of nipple loss with NSM. This study helps to define patient populations that may be at risk for necrosis and informs surgeon’s as to the best techniques for reconstruction to decrease the occurrence of nipple loss.