Implant-based Reconstruction Research Articles

The Use of Reinforced Ovine Mesh in Implant Breast Reconstruction: Equivalent Outcomes to Human Acellular Dermal Matrices and More Cost-effective.

The use of "mesh" in implant-based reconstruction is widespread, with both acellular dermal matrices (ADMs) and extracellular matrices (ECMs) being used, especially in prepectoral device placement. This study compared Ovitex (ovine ECM) versus human cadaveric ADMs to determine safety profiles and cost-effectiveness. A single surgeon's longitudinal experience with 2-stage, immediate tissue expander breast reconstruction from 2018 to 2023 was analyzed. Patients with AlloDerm and Cortiva (human ADM) were compared with those receiving Ovitex, and 90-day complications were analyzed by chi-squared and analysis of variance. Costs of each mesh were tabulated based on available market data. Patient demographics were comparable. Of 127 patients, 85 received ovine ECM (163 breasts) and 42 received cadaveric ADM (81 breasts). No significant difference between the groups for complications requiring return to the operating room (12.7% ovine vs 14.8% human (P = 0.31) or minor complications (9.8% ovine vs 7.4% human, P = 0.34). There was no difference between reconstructive success and failure between the 2 groups (P = 0.066). The cost of Ovitex was 24%-38% cheaper than Cortiva and AlloDerm, respectively. In this longitudinal, single-surgeon study of 2 different types of meshes in 2-stage expander implant breast reconstruction, we found ovine multilaminated reinforced extracellular matrix (Ovitex) was comparable in outcomes with human acellular dermal matrices (AlloDerm and Cortiva). Ovine mesh was considerably cheaper. Multiple factors determine which mesh should be chosen for implant breast reconstruction. This study supports the use of Ovitex as a cost-effective substitute for human acellular dermal matrices in implant breast reconstruction.

Comparison of Breast Sensibility Following Breast Reconstruction with Two Different Techniques: Deep Inferior Epigastric Perforator Flap and Implant

Introduction: Breast sensibility following reconstruction surgery, though often overlooked, holds significant importance due to its widespread occurrence and profound effects on patients’ well-being and safety. The author’s objective is to compare the sensory outcomes between deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap microsurgery reconstruction and implant-based reconstruction. Additionally, the potential influence of sociodemographic and clinical factors on sensory recovery is explored, along with assessing temperature discrimination abilities and evaluating quality of life. Material and methods: An ambispective descriptive-analytical study was conducted involving women who underwent mastectomy with reconstruction using either DIEP flap and implants at the author’s hospital between 1990–2021. Data were collected from medical records, patient histories, physical examinations, and validated quality of life questionnaires (BREAST-Q). Spearman’s or Pearson’s correlation coefficients were employed for the analysis of quantitative variables, while the Student’s T test or Mann-Whitney U test were used to compare quantitative and qualitative variables. Results: A total of 99 women with breast reconstruction were included, 47 with DIEP flap and 52 with implants. Sensory recovery in implant-based reconstruction was found to be superior to DIEP flap reconstruction (5.03 and 5.18, respectively; p<0.005). A direct correlation was observed between sensory improvement and thermal discrimination (Spearman coefficient 0.9; p<0.001). Factors such as radiotherapy, delayed reconstruction with DIEP flap, and height with implants were associated with poorer sensory recovery in the breast. Women experiencing better breast sensibility reported higher satisfaction with their surgeon, medical team, and psychosocial quality of life. Conclusion: Women reconstructed with implants or DIEP abdominal flap exhibit suboptimal overall sensory recovery of the reconstructed breast, with slightly better outcomes observed in women reconstructed with implants. The development of novel surgical techniques aimed at enhancing sensibility after breast reconstruction could significantly benefit these patients.

Breast implant illness in women with implant-based reconstruction after breast cancer

Abstract Background This study investigated the association between silicone breast implants and health symptoms (Breast Implant Illness (BII)) in women with implant-based breast reconstruction after breast cancer. While there is increasing evidence of an association with BII in cosmetic breast augmentation cases, for women with implant-based breast reconstruction this is unknown. Methods Retrospective cohort study of 254 women who underwent implant-based reconstruction after breast cancer and a control group of 487 women who underwent breast-conserving therapy or simple mastectomy. We linked Dutch Breast Implant Registry data (2015-2019) and general practice electronic health records data (2014-2022) to study the occurrence of thirteen BII-related health symptoms in general practice and the number of consultations for these symptoms one year before to three years after breast surgery. Results Over the three years following implantation, no significant differences in symptom occurrence were observed compared to both the year before implantation and the control group. Women with breast implants did not have more consultations compared to the control group during follow-up. However, there was an increased likelihood of multiple consultations in the first and second years post-implantation compared to before implantation (≥3 consultations first year OR = 2.10, p = 0.005; second year OR = 1.70, p = 0.048; ≥5 consultations first year OR = 2.57, p = 0.02). Conclusions This study found no evidence for BII in women with implant-based reconstruction after breast cancer. Despite certain limitations in examining BII in this specific patient group, these findings add valuable information to the decision-making process of breast cancer patients considering reconstructive options. Key messages • This is the first study on BII that focused solely on women with breast implants for reconstruction after breast cancer. • No evidence of BII was found in this patient group.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Inflammatory Breast Carcinoma: A Scoping Review.

Inflammatory breast carcinoma (IBC) is an aggressive form of breast cancer involving skin lymphatics. Breast reconstruction traditionally has been delayed in IBC. Immediate reconstruction has been described in select patients. Studies evaluating the reconstructive and oncologic safety of immediate breast reconstruction in this patient population are limited and retrospective. The purpose of this study is to assess the current body of literature on immediate breast reconstruction in IBC patients to identify knowledge gaps. A scoping review was conducted using PubMed, Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane databases. Original articles that evaluated patients diagnosed with IBC who underwent immediate breast reconstruction were included. The search yielded 821 articles, of which 9 articles containing 1429 IBC patients were included for analysis. Immediate implant-based reconstruction occurred in 12.2% (174/1429) of patients. Immediate autologous reconstruction occurred in 19.0% (272/1429). Immediate reconstruction with both autologous and implant-based techniques was 4.5% (64/1429). Reconstruction type was not reported for 63.0% (899/1429) of patients. Postoperative complications occurred in 1.8% (26/1429) of patients. Local cancer recurrence was 14.3% (3/21) at 18.9 months. The mortality rate was 32.4% (131/404) at 22 months. Performance of immediate breast reconstruction can be safely performed from a reconstructive standpoint in select patients.

Staged Nipple Delay Procedure Expands Candidacy for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

Nipple delay (ND) is a staged procedure that improves nipple-areolar complex (NAC) viability in nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) patients who are high-risk for NAC or skin-flap necrosis. This study compared postoperative outcomes and risk factors between patients treated with ND-NSM and NSM alone. Patient demographics, risk factors for NAC or skin-flap necrosis, tumor characteristics, and operative outcomes were compared between ND-NSM and NSM groups from 2009 to 2023. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify significant variables associated with NAC or skin-flap necrosis. Overall, 71 ND-NSM patients and 537 NSM patients were compared. ND-NSM patients had larger breasts (p<0.01), body mass index ≥ 30 (p=0.01), prior breast/chest wall radiation (XRT) [p<0.01], prior breast operations (p<0.01), less axillary surgery (p<0.01), more autologous tissue reconstruction over implant-based reconstruction compared with NSM patients (p=0.02), and more prophylaxis (p<0.01). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in regard to infection, skin-flap necrosis, NAC necrosis, seromas, and hematomas. No patients in the ND-NSM group had NAC necrosis and 1 patient had skin-flap necrosis, compared with 17 and 13 patients in the NSM group, respectively (p=0.24). On univariate analysis, prior XRT was associated with increased risk for skin-flap necrosis (p=0.02). Multivariate analysis showed XRT was associated with skin-flap necrosis (p=0.02) and any necrosis (p=0.01). Breast size was associated with NAC or skin-flap necrosis (p=0.04). Larger breasts and XRT were risk factors for NAC or skin-flap necrosis; however, despite having more risk factors, ND-NSM patients had very low rates of necrosis. Notably, no nipples were lost. A shared decision should be made with patients regarding the risks and benefits of ND-NSM.

Meta analysis of 2059 patients assessing early discharge after DIEP flap breast reconstruction: Comprehensive outcomes before post-operative day 5

Autologous reconstruction with DIEP flap has illustrated greater patient satisfaction with both aesthetic satisfaction and reconstructive treatment process when compared to implant-based reconstruction longitudinally. However, DIEP flap breast reconstruction is associated with longer in-patient hospitalizations to monitor flap status. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to report outcomes regarding the use of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols, particularly looking at the impact on complication rates in patients who undergo DIEP flap procedures and are discharged within 5 days after surgery. A computerized search was conducted on September 29th, 2023 using the MeSH terms "Free Tissue Flaps" OR "Myocutaneous Flap" OR "Surgical Flaps" AND "Patient Discharge". Twenty-four papers reporting on 2059 patients were included in the study, and four study groups were created by length of stay as follows: LOS 1-1.99 days = Group 1, LOS 2-2.99 days = Group 2, LOS 3-3.99 = Group 3, and LOS 4-5 days = Group 4 (control). An independent samples t-test was performed to compare the mean rates of each complication between Groups 1 and 4, Groups 2 and 4, and Groups 3 and 4. This meta-analysis showed no significant differences between rates of hematoma, seroma, infection and reoperation between groups. There was a significantly lower rate of total flap loss in all 3 groups with LOS less than 4 days when compared to the group with LOS between 4 and 5 days. This meta-analysis shows that appropriate patients may be discharged safely as early as POD1 following DIEP flap.

Autologous Breast Reconstruction and Radiotherapy: Consensus Report of the German-Speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM)

Autologous postmastectomy breast reconstruction is associated with favourable long-term clinical outcomes and superior patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) compared with implant-based reconstruction. However, adjuvant radiotherapy has traditionally been considered a relative contraindication to immediate flap-based reconstruction due to its unpredictable effects on the reconstructive outcome. While modern adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) has been able to significantly reduce acute and chronic radiation-induced complications, plastic surgeons still hesitate to offer immediate autologous reconstruction to patients expected to undergo adjuvant radiotherapy. More recently, evidence has emerged suggesting a paradigm shift in favour of immediate autologous reconstruction despite subsequent radiotherapy. At the 44th Annual Meeting of the German-speaking Society for Reconstructive Microsurgery (GSRM) in Bern, Switzerland, a workshop discussed the literature on PMRT and autologous breast reconstruction, aiming to establish consensus among the participants. Several areas of agreement were identified, including the goals of postmastectomy reconstruction, specifically the creation of a soft and sensitive breast symmetrical in shape and size to the unaffected breast via the safest procedure possible. The importance of preserving the maximum amount of native breast skin envelope through skin- and nipple-sparing approaches was emphasised. Finally, a consensus was reached that PMRT should no longer be considered a contraindication to immediate autologous breast reconstruction.

Validating the porcine model for microsurgical perforator training: Can surgeons trained on pig perforator dissection successfully perform human DIEP flap procedures? A pilot study

Autologous breast reconstruction, especially using the deep inferior epigastric artery perforator (DIEP) flap, is increasingly seen as a reliable, safe, and long-term alternative to implant-based reconstruction. Despite the recognized advantages of the DIEP flap for breast reconstruction, successful realization demands excellent anatomical knowledge, a thorough understanding of autologous breast reconstruction concepts and advanced microsurgical skills. Given that the porcine model is widely employed in microsurgical training, our study aims to assess this model using validated outcomes, with the objective of evaluating the enhancement in a surgeon's learning curve following training with this model. Forty DIEP flaps were harvested on 20 swines by a single surgeon in "Pius Branzeu Center" (Timisoara, RO) and "Drazan Institute" (University of veterinary of Brno, CZ) laboratories for microsurgical training in 6months (January 2015-June 2015). Then we analyzed data from 40 DIEP flaps harvested by the same surgeon on first 20 consecutive patients undergoing DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Perforator dissection time, surgeon-determined dissection difficulty score (DDS) and venous congestion rate were collected for each flap in porcine model and in patients, then compared and analyzed. The mean of DDS score analysis in first and second swines group dissection resulted as statistically significant (P-value 0.0001), while it was not statistically significant between those analyzed in the second group of swines dissected and patients (P-value 0.8037). Reduction in perforator dissection time between the two swines' groups and in venous congestion rates from the first swines groups to the second to the human group resulted statistically significant too (P-value respectively 0.0001 and 0.0079). The porcine model has been used for a long time together with other animal models for microsurgical training. Our study confirms and objective by validated scores that it is a valid and reliable model, comparable to the human one and which mimics the dissection of human perforating vessels.

Volumetric evaluation of autologous fat transfer for total breast reconstruction

BackgroundReconstructive surgeons have shifted from correcting contour irregularities using autologous fat transfer (AFT) toward reconstructing full breasts. Although many studies have researched the volumetric aspects of AFT, some outcomes such as volume retention and viability, as well as possible confounders for graft survival, remain unclear. This study aimed to answer these questions. MethodsPost-mastectomy women of the multicenter prospective BREAST-trial were randomized to either AFT breast reconstruction or implant-based reconstruction (IBR). Volumes were assessed using the Vectra 3D imaging system and compared at 12 months postoperative. Volume retention was defined as the augmented volume divided by the lipofilling volume. Significant confounders for graft survival were identified using multivariable regression analysis. ResultsA total of 148 patients (75 AFT, 73 IBR) were included in the final analyses. Postoperative volumes differed significantly at 12 months in favor of the IBR group (83.8ml, p<0.001). For AFT patients, graft survival did not decrease between 6 and 12 months, with a mean graft survival of 37.1% at 12 months. Significant confounders for graft survival included chest circumference (β=1.107, p=0.001), comorbidities (β =28.567, p=0.002), age (β =-0.514, p=0.007) and total lipofilling (β =-0.028, p<0.001). ConclusionPlastic surgeons can reconstruct voluminous breasts post-mastectomy using only AFT, these breast volumes stabilize at six months and VECTRA 3D is reliable for breast volume measurement. About a third of the grafted fat was calculated to survive postoperative and reconstructive surgeons should be aware not to transfer too much fat in one session.

Conventional versus Robot-Assisted Immediate Breast Reconstruction: Reconstructive Outcome and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

In this study, the authors compared conventional and robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to report the results of robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction and provide a comparison of patient-reported outcomes. This retrospective study included 473 breasts of 423 patients who underwent conventional mastectomy and breast reconstruction and 164 breasts of 153 patients who underwent robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction from July of 2019 to October of 2021. Demographic and oncologic data, reconstructive outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were evaluated. The results of implant-based and autologous breast reconstruction were evaluated separately. Skin necrosis requiring surgical débridement occurred significantly more frequently in the conventional group (8.0%) than in the robot-assisted group (2.0%) in implant-based reconstruction ( P = 0.035). At 6 to 12 months, patients who underwent robot-assisted breast reconstruction showed a higher Sexual Well-being score for implant-based reconstruction and a higher Physical Well-being score for autologous breast reconstruction than conventional breast reconstruction according to the BREAST-Q questionnaire. Robot-assisted mastectomy and breast reconstruction was associated with less skin necrosis and better patient-reported outcomes (Sexual Well-being for implant-based reconstruction and Physical Well-being for autologous breast reconstruction) than the conventional option. Robotic surgery could be a good option for mastectomy and breast reconstruction. Therapeutic, III.

Comparison of Outcomes after Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Latissimus Dorsi with Immediate Fat Transfer versus Abdominally Based Free Flaps.

Autologous breast reconstruction confers favorable patient reports of satisfaction and quality of life compared with implant-based reconstruction over a lifetime. The latissimus dorsi with immediate fat transfer (LIFT) is an alternative approach to abdominally based free flaps (Ab-FF), which expands fully autologous reconstruction to nonmicrosurgeons. This study compared the 2 procedures concerning their clinical and patient-reported outcomes 1 year postoperatively. The authors conducted a retrospective review of LIFTs and Ab-FFs performed between March of 2017 and August of 2022. The primary outcomes were postoperative complications, reoperations, and longitudinal BREAST-Q scores. BREAST-Q modules included Satisfaction with Breasts, Satisfaction with Abdomen, Satisfaction with Back, Psychosocial Well-being, Physical Well-being: Chest, Physical Well-being: Abdomen, Physical Well-being: Back, and Sexual Well-being. Of the 281 included patients (408 breasts), 211 received Ab-FF and 70 received LIFT. One-year follow-up (median [interquartile range], 12 [12] months) demonstrated that Ab-FF independently predicted dehiscence, reoperation procedures, and revisional surgery. LIFT independently increased the odds of seroma. Obesity predicted dehiscence, and bilateral reconstructions predicted revisional fat grafting. BREAST-Q scores fluctuated over time but were similar across all measured domains by 1 year postoperatively. Although Ab-FF is the standard approach for fully autologous reconstruction, LIFT procedures may be associated with a less complicated postoperative course while eliciting similar patient-reported outcomes. LIFT may be preferred to limit postoperative complications, particularly in patients with obesity. LIFT can be used by plastic surgeons who are not trained in microsurgical procedures or do not have an environment that fosters Ab-FF. Therapeutic, III.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy for Cancer Among US Military Health System Beneficiaries.

In the Military Health System (MHS), women with breast cancer may undergo surgical treatment in military hospitals (direct care) or in the civilian setting via the insurance benefit (private sector care). We conducted this study to determine immediate breast reconstruction rates among women undergoing mastectomy for cancer in the MHS by setting of care. Using the linked Department of Defense's Central Cancer Registry and MHS Data Repository, the Department of Defense's medical claims database, we identified adult women who underwent mastectomy for breast cancer from 1998 to 2014. Patients were then subgrouped by setting of care (direct vs private sector care). The primary outcome was the rate and type of immediate breast reconstruction. Regression models were constructed to determine factors associated with receipt of immediate breast reconstruction. The final sample included 3251 women who underwent mastectomy for cancer in the direct (67.0%) or private sector care (32.6%) settings. The overall rate of immediate breast reconstruction was 29.9% with an upward trend noted throughout the study (P < 0.001). Overall, implant-based reconstruction (81.4%) was more common than tissue-based reconstruction (18.6%). Compared with direct care, the immediate breast reconstruction rate was significantly higher in the private sector care setting (49.3% vs 20.5%, P < 0.001) despite accounting for differences in clinical characteristics (adjusted odds ratio = 4.51, 95% confidence interval [3.72-5.46]). Immediate breast reconstruction in the direct care setting lags that in the civilian community during the study time period. Further research is needed to ascertain current immediate reconstruction rates and understand factors contributing to any differences in rates between care settings.

Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Salvage with Negative Pressure Wound Therapy with Instillation: An Evaluation of Outcomes.

Implant infection is problematic in breast reconstruction. Traditionally, infected tissue expanders (TE)/implants are removed for several months before replacement, resulting in breast reconstruction delay. Salvage involving device removal, negative pressure wound therapy with instillation and dwell (NPWTi-d) placement, and early staged TE/implant replacement within a few days has been described. The purpose of this study was to compare outcomes of the NPWTi-d salvage pathway with traditional implant removal. A retrospective review was performed on patients who underwent implant-based reconstruction and developed TE/implant infection/exposure requiring removal. Patients were divided into two groups. Group 1 had TE/implant removal, NPWTi-d placement, and TE/implant replacement 1-4 days later. Group 2 (control) underwent standard TE/implant removal and no NPWTi-d. Reinfection after TE/implant salvage, TE/implant-free days, and time to final reconstruction were assessed. The study included 47 patients (76 TE/implants) in group 1 (13 patients, 16 TE/implants) and group 2 (34 patients, 60 TE/implants). The success rate (no surgical-site infection within 90 days) of implant salvage was 81.3% in group 1. No group 1 patients abandoned completing reconstruction after TE/implant loss versus 38.2% (13 of 34) in group 2 (P = 0.0094). Mean implant-free days was 2.5 ± 1.2 in group 1 versus 134.6 ± 78.5 in group 2 (P = 0.0001). The interval to final implant-based reconstruction was 69.0 ± 69.7 days in group 1 versus 225.6 ± 93.6 days in group 2 (P = 0.0001). A breast implant salvage pathway with infected device removal, NPWTi-d placement, and early TE/implant replacement was successful in 81.3%. Patients experienced 132 less implant-free days and faster time to final reconstruction.

Future challenges in the surgical treatment of breast cancer – Oncoplastic, prophylactic procedures and reconstructive surgery

AbstractMedical knowledge is doubling faster and faster. Surgeons are highly specialized and must be trained not only in surgery, but also in imaging and oncology to meet the modern requirements of a breast center. This article describes what has changed in the surgical treatment of breast cancer over the past 20 years since the introduction of certified breast centers in Germany, and what could change in the future. Pre- and post-operative conferences have become a central component of the interdisciplinary exchange of information. Every breast-conserving operation must be precisely planned, marked and carried out in a controlled manner. Basic anatomical knowledge is not sufficient enough to perform a prophylactic mastectomy. Implant-based reconstructions change their shape and strength over time and usually lead to follow-up operations. Tissue engineering offers interesting approaches to replace the disadvantages of conventional implants in order to achieve the durability and quality similar to autologous tissue reconstructions.

Current status of prepectoral breast reconstruction in Argentina.

Breast cancer is among the most common cancers diagnosed in women, affecting one in eight women per year. Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction has emerged as the predominant approach for postmastectomy reconstruction, with a growing preference for the direct-to-implant (DTI) method over the traditional tissue expander technique. While conventionally, implants were typically positioned beneath the pectoralis major muscle, recent advancements have paved the way for implant placement above the muscle, in the prepectoral plane. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) techniques can be combined with prepectoral breast reconstruction. The presence of sufficient fatty tissue coverage is considered one of the foremost independent factors influencing the success of immediate breast reconstruction and flap viability. DTI is a safe approach for prepectoral implant-based reconstruction with a number of advantages. However, careful patient selection and judicious assessment of flap perfusion help identify an appropriate subset of patients for prepectoral DTI reconstruction. Proposed breast tissue coverage classification (BTCC) and rigorous perfusion assessment techniques will aid to minimize postoperative complications and reconstruction failure. Based on the obtained range of coverage values (distance between the Cooper's ligaments and the skin) of preoperative digital mammogram evaluation, a three-type BTCC is as follows: Type 1: <1 cm (poor coverage), Type 2: between 1 and 2 cm (medium coverage), Type 3: >2 cm (good coverage). Prepectoral DTI reconstruction provides good results with complication rates similar to those of subpectoral techniques, eliminating breast animation. A meticulous surgical technique is essential to preserve the vascular network that guarantees the survival of the skin flap and nipple-areola complex (NAC). In the good coverage group (Type 3), an immediate DTI reconstruction could be safely performed. Aesthetic complications as rippling can occur if prepectoral implants are placed in Type 1 patients. Preoperative planning for prepectoral placement should not depend on breast volume, but on breast tissue coverage. Flap evaluation based on preoperative imaging measurements may be helpful when planning a conservative mastectomy. Patient selection, preoperative and intraoperative mastectomy flap evaluation, and modifications in implant technology play a critical role in this new and rapidly growing method for implant-based breast reconstruction.

Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the United States: a narrative review of the current state.

Breast reconstruction with microsurgical techniques allows for autologous reconstruction after mastectomy without the complications associated with alloplastic reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction has undergone significant improvement and now offers patients a variety of options depending on patient specific factors and aesthetic outcomes. This review aims to focus on the history of autologous reconstruction, operative considerations, general surgical techniques for flaps, and indications for choosing the ideal free tissue transfer for all medical specialties and not only plastic surgeons. A comprehensive review of the literature was performed using PubMed and Embase databases. Manuscripts that provided objective data with respect to history of microsurgical options, surgical techniques, patient considerations, and contraindications were utilized for this review with the objective to simplify data for all non-plastic surgeon readers. In this study, we find that patient selection is critical in successful outcomes for microsurgical breast reconstruction. We find that abdominal free flaps are now considered gold standard for autologous reconstruction. However, reliable alternatives exist for patients who are not considered ideal candidates for this reconstruction. These include thigh-based flaps such as gracilis myocutaneous flaps, profunda artery perforator flaps, lateral thigh perforator flaps and trunk-based flaps such as lumbar artery perforator flap. Postoperative considerations involve clinical monitoring and enhanced recovery after surgery. The rate of reconstructive success and flap viability is greater that 95%, even in high-risk populations, and therefore risk stratification should be performed based on an individual basis. While there are no absolute contraindications to autologous reconstruction, relative contraindications do exist including obesity and elderly populations due to the increased surgical and medical complications. While implant-based reconstruction remains the predominant method of breast reconstruction in the United States, there have been many exciting advancements in autologous reconstruction that offers high aesthetic outcomes and patient satisfaction.

Timing and type of breast reconstruction in SweBRO 3: long-term outcomes.

Breast reconstruction after mastectomy helps women with breast cancer feel better about their bodies and lives. There is debate about the best time and type of reconstruction (immediate versus delayed, and using own tissue versus implants). Long-term studies are rare. This study looked at long-term results of different breast reconstruction methods and timings in Swedish women who had mastectomies in 2000, 2005 or 2010. It focused on how satisfied the women were with their surgeries and their quality of life. The study included 5853 women from the Swedish National Breast Cancer Registry who had mastectomies in 2000, 2005 or 2010. Of these, 2904 women answered the survey, and 895 had breast reconstruction. Satisfaction and quality of life were measured using two surveys: EORTC QLQ-BRECON23 and BREAST-Q. Of the women who answered the survey, 895 (31%) had breast reconstruction. Of these, 176 (20%) had immediate reconstruction, and 719 (80%) had delayed reconstruction; 58% had implant-based reconstructions, 31% had reconstructions using their own tissue, 2% had both types and 9% did not report the type of reconstruction. There were no major differences in satisfaction between immediate and delayed reconstruction. Women who used their own tissue were more satisfied with their results and breast appearance than those with implants. Autologous reconstruction leads to better satisfaction and outcomes than implants. The timing of reconstruction (immediate versus delayed) was less of an influence on quality of life.

Hypofractionated vs Conventionally Fractionated Postmastectomy Radiation After Implant-Based Reconstruction

Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) improves local-regional disease control and patient survival. Hypofractionation (HF) regimens have comparable efficacy and complication rates with improved quality of life compared with conventional fractionation (CF) schedules. However, the use of HF after mastectomy in patients undergoing breast reconstruction has not been prospectively examined. To compare HF and CF PMRT outcomes after implant-based reconstruction. This randomized clinical trial assessed patients 18 years or older undergoing mastectomy and immediate expander or implant reconstruction for breast cancer (Tis, TX, or T1-3) and unilateral PMRT from March 8, 2018, to November 3, 2021 (median [range] follow-up, 40.4 [15.4-63.0] months), at 16 US cancer centers or hospitals. Analyses were conducted between September and December 2023. Patients were randomized 1:1 to HF or CF PMRT. Chest wall doses were 4256 cGy for 16 fractions for HF and 5000 cGy for 25 fractions for CF. Chest wall toxic effects were defined as a grade 3 or higher adverse event. The primary outcome was the change in physical well-being (PWB) domain of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) quality-of-life assessment tool at 6 months after starting PMRT, controlling for age. Secondary outcomes included toxic effects and cancer recurrence. Of 400 women (201 in the CF arm and 199 in the HF arm; median [range] age, 47 [23-79] years), 330 patients had PWB scores at baseline and at 6 months. There was no difference in the change in PWB between the study arms (estimate, 0.13; 95% CI, -0.86 to 1.11; P = .80), but there was a significant interaction between age group and study arm (P = .03 for interaction). Patients younger than 45 years had higher 6-month absolute PWB scores if treated with HF rather than CF regimens (23.6 [95% CI, 22.7-24.6] vs 22.0 [95% CI, 20.7-23.3]; P = .047) and reported being less bothered by adverse effects (mean [SD], 3.0 [0.9] in the HF arm and 2.6 [1.2] in the CF arm; P = .02) or nausea (mean [SD], 3.8 [0.4] in the HF arm and 3.6 [0.8] in the CF arm; P = .04). In the as-treated cohort, there were 23 distant (11 in the HF arm and 12 in the CF arm) and 2 local-regional (1 in the HF arm and 1 in the CF arm) recurrences. Chest wall toxic effects occurred in 39 patients (20 in the HF arm and 19 in the CF arm) at a median (IQR) of 7.2 (1.8-12.9) months. Fractionation was not associated with chest wall toxic effects on multivariate analysis (HF arm: hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.52-2.00; P = .95). Fewer patients undergoing HF vs CF regimens had a treatment break (5 [2.7%] vs 15 [7.7%]; P = .03) or required unpaid time off from work (17 [8.5%] vs 34 [16.9%]; P = .02). In this randomized clinical trial, the HF regimen did not significantly improve change in PWB compared with the CF regimen. These data add to the increasing experience with HF PMRT in patients with implant-based reconstruction. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03422003.

Mastectomy Incision Choice in Ptotic Patients Undergoing Immediate Implant-Based Reconstruction: A Comparison of Wise-Pattern and Oblique-Elliptical Incisions.

Breast ptosis presents challenges for implant-based reconstruction due to the large skin envelope. Skin-reducing mastectomy reduces the envelope but must consider many other factors including complications. Limited data exist on incision impact on outcomes. We compare oblique-elliptical and Wise-pattern incisions on complications and patient-reported quality of life in immediate implant-based reconstruction.A retrospective review of patients who underwent immediate implant-based skin-reducing mastectomy at a single institution from 2015 to 2021 was done and was divided into two cohorts: wise and oblique incisions. Demographics, complications, and patient-reported outcomes (BREAST-Q) were compared. Descriptive, t test, and chi-square test analyses, followed by adjusted linear and logistic regression models, were performed to compare complication rates and BREAST-Q scores.Eighty-nine patient breasts were analyzed, 39 (43.8%) in the oblique (OI) and 50 (56.2%) in the wise (WI) cohort. No differences in demographics or preoperative comorbidities between groups were found. The oblique incision patients had significantly more mean total complications (OI 1.46 vs WI 0.88; P = 0.048), as well as increased incidence of explantation (OI 15 vs WI 3; P = 0.003) and cellulitis (OI 14 vs WI 3; P = 0.020) compared to wise group. Linear regression analysis revealed that incision choice was a significant predictor of complication rate (β = -1.06, 95% CI [-1.63--0.50], P = <0.001). Logistic regression analysis showed that incision was a significant predictor of specific complications such as explantation (odds ratio = 0.10, 95% CI [0.02-0.52], P = 0.006) and cellulitis (odds ratio = 0.16, 95% CI [0.03-0.73], P = 0.018), with decreased risk of choosing wise incision. There was no difference in BREAST-Q results.Ptotic patients with oblique incision are associated with higher rates of postoperative complications compared to wise incisions.These findings suggest that incision choice is an important factor in postoperative complication development and emphasizes the need for further investigation and discussion with patients during preoperative planning.

71793 - Infectious complications after immediate versus delayed implant-based reconstruction in women with breast cancer – a retrospective cohort study

71793 - Infectious complications after immediate versus delayed implant-based reconstruction in women with breast cancer – a retrospective cohort study