Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Ptosis: Using a Free Nipple Graft with Tissue Expander Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomies are increasingly offered to women with breast cancer given the evidence for oncologic safety and improved cosmetic outcomes. Women with significant ptosis are often excluded due to potential nipple malposition and increased risk of nipple ischemia. The use of a harvested free nipple graft may allow women with ptosis to conserve their nipple -areolar complex. METHODS: This is an IRB approved retrospective study of breast cancer patients at an academic center with ptosis who underwent free-nipple graft mastectomies with a single plastic surgeon and 5 dedicated breast surgeons from 2014-2017. The primary outcomes were free nipple graft viability and the need for revision. Secondary outcomes included post-operative complications. RESULTS: Fourteen women with ptosis underwent skin and nipple-sparing mastectomy with breast reconstruction involving use of harvested free-nipple graft. More than half of the women were diagnosed with early-stage invasive breast cancer (42% stage 1, 14% stage 2). Four women underwent mastectomy for prophylaxis or other benign reasons. All of the women had significant ptosis during the pre-operative evaluation (57% grade 2 ptosis, 36% grade 3 ptosis, and 7% uncategorized), with an average BMI of 30. None were active smokers. In the postoperative period, one had partial nipple necrosis in combination with skin flap necrosis and positive margin (7%). Other complications included infection (14%) and hypopigmentation (14%). All nipples lost sensation and full projection. CONCLUSIONS: This is a novel approach using a free nipple graft with a skin envelope reducing mastectomy and immediate expander-based reconstruction. This successful approach allows women with ptosis to undergo nipple-sparing mastectomy with preservation of the nipple -areolar complex.

Comparing preoperative imaging modalities in patient selection for breast intraoperative radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the relative accuracy of mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in predicting the tumor size of early stage breast tumors in preoperative selection of patients for intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT). METHODS: We identified 156 patients with clinical T1/T2, N0 breast cancer who underwent IORT. Clinical, pathologic, and radiation data were collected. The preoperative tumor size obtained by imaging was compared with tumor pathological size. RESULTS: The median patient age was 66. The mean tumor size at excision was 1.05 cm (0.1-3.0 cm). Out of the 156 patients, 98 had a reported, nonzero tumor size by mammography, 131 by ultrasound, and 76 by MRI. The mean difference between imaging and the tumor size was +0.062 ± 0.54 cm for mammography, -0.11 ± 0.43 cm for ultrasound, and +0.33 ± 0.55 cm for MRI, with positive values indicating an overestimate of the tumor size. MRI produced more overestimates of tumor size of at least 0.5 cm than mammography or ultrasound in a paired analysis of patients who received both modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of imaging modalities in determining tumor size can influence patients' eligibility for IORT. Mammography and ultrasound showed acceptable accuracy in predicting size. MRI overestimated tumor size and may inappropriately exclude patients from IORT. We would discourage ruling out candidates for IORT on the basis of large size by MRI alone.

Single Institution Experience with Lymphatic Microsurgical Preventive Healing Approach (LYMPHA) for the Primary Prevention of Lymphedema.

BACKGROUND: As many as 40 % of breast cancer patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and radiotherapy develop lymphedema. We report our experience performing lymphatic-venous anastomosis using the lymphatic microsurgical preventive healing approach (LYMPHA) at the time of ALND. This technique was described by Boccardo, Campisi in 2009. METHODS: LYMPHA was offered to node-positive women with breast cancer requiring ALND. Afferent lymphatic vessels, identified by injection of blue dye in the ipsilateral arm, were sutured into a branch of the axillary vein distal to a competent valve. Follow-up was with pre- and postoperative lymphoscintigraphy, arm measurements, and (L-Dex®) bioimpedance spectroscopy. RESULTS: Over 26 months, 37 women underwent attempted LYMPHA, with successful completion in 27. Unsuccessful attempts were due to lack of a suitable vein (n = 3) and lymphatic (n = 5) or extensive axillary disease (n = 1). There were no LYMPHA-related complications. Mean follow-up time was 6 months (range 3-24 months). Among completed patients, 10 (37%) had a body mass index of ≥30 kg/m(2) (mean 27.9 ± 6.8 kg/m(2), range 17.4-47.6 kg/m(2)), and 17 (63%) received axillary radiotherapy. Excluding two patients with preoperative lymphedema and those with less than 3-month follow-up, the lymphedema rate was 3 (12.5%) of 24 in successfully completed and 4 (50 %) of 8 in unsuccessfully treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: Our transient lymphedema rate in this high-risk cohort of patients was 12.5%. Early data show that LYMPHA is feasible, safe, and effective for the primary prevention of breast cancer-related lymphedema.