Symmetry of Nipple Position After Bilateral Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Implant-Based Reconstruction: The Impact of Reconstructive Method.

PURPOSE: Asymmetry of nipple position is common in the female population. There are scant data on the impact of bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and immediate implant-based reconstruction on nipple asymmetry. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of an institutional review board approved prospective database of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction was performed. BCCT.core software was used to examine preoperative and postoperative nipple asymmetry. It directly calculates the quantitative differences in nipple position between the breasts expressed as breast retraction assessment (BRA). Nipple to sternal notch (N-SN) asymmetry was calculated from the collected data. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients undergoing bilateral NSM and implant reconstruction were reviewed. Reconstructive methods were tissue expander (TE) 39 (57.4%) and direct to implant (DTI) (prepectoral 13, submuscular 16) 29 (42.6%). The TE group had greater body mass index (BMI) (23.5 vs 22.1, P = 0.02), mastectomy weight (390.7 vs 243.8, P = 0.001) and higher preoperative N-SN asymmetry (TE 0.89 vs DTI 0.59, P = 0.02). Ten patients received radiation (TE group 4, DTI group 6). The TE group had larger implant size (479.1 vs 375.0, P = 0.0001). Overall, TE reconstruction resulted in an increase in nipple asymmetry (mean BRA: preoperative, 1.50 vs postoperative, 1.65), which was not significant. Direct to implant reconstruction increased nipple asymmetry: mean N-SN asymmetry preoperative 0.59 versus postoperative 0.97 (P = 0.04) and mean BRA scores 1.40 and 1.82 (P = 0.06). Both implant locations in the DTI group resulted in an increase in postoperative asymmetry but was significant for the prepectoral group: mean BRA preoperative 1.19 versus postoperative 1.85, P = 0.02 and mean N-SN asymmetry preoperative 0.48 vs postoperative 0.94, P = 0.04. Radiation impacted the final mean BRA score: radiation 2.24 versus no radiation 1.63 (P = 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who underwent TE reconstruction had significantly larger breasts and greater preoperative N-SN asymmetry than the DTI group. Despite this, the TE group resulted in mild increase in nipple asymmetry. Both implant locations in DTI reconstruction resulted in increased postoperative asymmetry but was significant for the prepectoral group. Radiation therapy has a significant impact of nipple asymmetry.

The Impact of Tissue Expander Nipple Asymmetry on Final Implant Symmetry After Bilateral Nipple Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Asymmetry of nipple position is common in the female population and very difficult to correct after nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM). There are scant data on the impact of tissue expander (TE) nipple asymmetry on final implant nipple symmetry after bilateral NSM. METHODS: A retrospective review of an institutional review board-approved prospective database of NSM and immediate 2-stage implant reconstruction between June 2014 and December 2019 was performed. BCCT.core software was used to examine TE and final implant nipple asymmetry as well as relative breast implant position. Horizontal and/or vertical asymmetry and breast retraction assessment (BRA) were evaluated. Moderate asymmetry was defined as ≥1 cm and severe asymmetry as ≥2 cm. Lower breast contour ≥1 cm defined implant malposition. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients met the inclusion criteria. Linear regression analysis showed a significant relationship between TE BRA and final BRA (R2 = 0.2321, P = 0.02) with a mean TE BRA of 2.04 and a mean final BRA of 1.53 (P = 0.05). Tissue expander nipple asymmetry was predictive of final BRA score: no TE asymmetry, 0.87, versus TE nipple asymmetry, 1.67 (P = 0.02). Tissue expander lower breast contour ≥1 cm occurred in 8 patients (36.4%) and was associated with implant nipple asymmetry in 7 (87.5%). The second stage of reconstruction significantly improved the nipple asymmetry in those with TE malposition (TE BRA, 2.34, vs final BRA, 1.67; P = 0.05). Two patients who received radiation had increased BRA scores (radiation, 2.14, vs no radiation, 1.47; P = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: Tissue expander nipple asymmetry as measured by BRA score or nipple asymmetry was predictive of final nipple symmetry. The second stage of TE reconstruction improves the nipple asymmetry. Final implant exchange can allow for pocket and implant manipulation, improving nipple symmetry. Radiation therapy to TE reconstruction has a negative impact on nipple symmetry after the final stage.