Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center study.

BACKGROUND: In invasive breast cancer, there are no differences among the mid- and long-term oncological safety results of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and simple mastectomy (SM). There are several reports comparing NSM and SSM with SM in the context of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS); however, the eligibility criteria vary among institutions, and there are no reports that compare all three surgical methods simultaneously within the same institution. This study aimed to compare the local recurrence and survival rates of the three techniques (NSM, SSM, and SM) in Japanese patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS. METHODS: Patients undergoing NSM, SSM, or SM at our institution between 2006 and 2015 were identified, and their outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS: The mean follow-up period was 80.4 months (standard deviation [SD]: 37.1 months). NSM was performed in 152 cases, SSM in 49, and SM in 44. Five of 245 patients developed local recurrences. Four of these patients had invasive cancer. The primary endpoints of 5-year cumulative local recurrence were 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0-5.0) for NSM, 2.2% (95% CI: 0.0-6.3) for SSM, and 0% (95% CI: 0.0-0.0) for SM. There were no significant differences among the 5-year local recurrence rates. CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center, retrospective study, the oncological safety of SSM and NSM for DCIS was comparable to that of conventional SM.

Prognosis of isolated locoregional recurrence after early breast cancer with immediate breast reconstruction surgery: a retrospective multi­institutional study.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis in patients with breast cancer with isolated locoregional recurrence (ILRR) without simultaneous distant metastases after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) remains unknown. We aimed to investigate the prognosis in this patient population. METHODS: This multi-institutional retrospective observational study evaluated 3295 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent IBR at 12 Japanese medical facilities between January 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016. The outcome measures were the prognostic factors for ILRR after IBR, 5-year distant metastasis-free interval (DMFI), and 5-year overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Mastectomy or skin-sparing mastectomy was performed in 3295 patients. ILRR occurred in 70 patients, and the median observation period from ILRR diagnosis was 39.3 months. Of the 70 patients, 9 (12.9%) had axillary lymph node recurrence (ALNR) at the time of ILRR diagnosis. The 5-year DMFI and OS rates after ILRR were 92.4% and 91.2%, respectively. Pathological lymph node metastasis at primary surgery (P = 0.041) and ALNR (P = 0.022) at ILRR were significantly associated with DMFI in the univariate analysis. ALNR was the only independent prognostic factor in the multivariate analysis (P = 0.041). Post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT; P = 0.022) and ALNR (P = 0.043) were significantly associated with OS in the univariate analysis, and both PMRT (P = 0.010) and ALNR (P = 0.028) were independent prognostic factors in the multivariate analysis for OS. CONCLUSIONS: Although patients with breast cancer who had ILRR after IBR have favorable prognosis, ALNR may lead to poor prognosis. To the best of our knowledge, this study is the first to report the prognosis of these patients.

Endoscopic mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction with fat grafting for breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Although endoscopic mastectomy has been associated with good tolerance and enhanced patient satisfaction, limitations such as the implant or flap size for reconstruction with small incisions remain unresolved. Fat grafting (FG) can expand tissue volume with pinhole skin incisions. Herein, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of endoscopic mastectomy followed by immediate FG. METHODS: Patients who underwent endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG reconstruction from 2015 to 2021 were retrospectively evaluated to establish surgical outcomes and prognosis. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients with clinical stage 0 or I breast cancer underwent unilateral endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG. The median age was 45 years (41-55), and the median body mass index was 19.3 kg/m2 (15.8-26.6). Endoscopically performed procedures included skin-sparing mastectomies in 18 patients (78%) and nipple-sparing mastectomies in five patients (22%). The median procedure duration was 295 min (242-346). The median specimen weight was 133 g (71-334), and the median grafted fat volume was 200 mL (136-320). No patient required reoperation or additional procedures for complications. One patient experienced recurrence at a median follow-up of 56.1 months and underwent resection; the patient was alive without recurrence 54 months post-resection. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of endoscopic mastectomy with immediate FG for reconstruction. When compared with other immediate autologous reconstructions, our strategy could minimize the skin incision and procedure duration, as well as limit complications. Further prospective investigations are needed to evaluate oncological safety, surgical outcomes, and patient satisfaction.

Areolar reconstruction: MICAP flap as a skin paddle donor site in skin sparing mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction.

The main advantage of preserving the nipple-areola complex (NAC) in small to moderate size breasts reconstruction is that the main diameters of the breast mound remain unaltered. When for oncological reason the NAC must be excised, a paddle of skin needs to be borrowed from a donor site and transferred into the surgical defect to maintain the breast contour. While this is easily achievable with the majority of autologous reconstructions, it is very challenging in the context of implant-based reconstructions, where the primary closure of the defect leads to a flattened breast mound and suboptimal cosmetic results. In our experience, the medial intercostal artery perforator flap enables the safe resection of the NAC with concurrent reconstruction of the defect, allowing a satisfactory cosmetic result in terms of contour and projection even in the setting of implant-based reconstruction.

Long-term follow-up of complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery, standard breast conservation and skin-sparing mastectomy in DCIS - a register-based study.

BACKGROUND: Few studies evaluate oncological safety in complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery(C-OBCS) for DCIS. It still needs to be defined whether it is equivalent to standard breast conservation(S-BCS) or an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy(SSM). This study compares local recurrence rates(LR), disease-free survival(DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the three surgical techniques. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective register-based study on LR, DFS and OS of patients operated with S-BCS(n=1388), C-OBCS (n=106) or skin-sparing mastectomy (n=218) for DCIS diagnosed 2007-2020. Data was extracted from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry. RESULTS: In the S-BCS, C-OBCS and SSM groups, median age was 60, 58 and 51 years (p<0.001), median size 15, 25, and 40 mm (p<0.001) and median follow-up 55, 48 and 76 months. At ten years, the overall LR was 12.7%, 14.3% for S-BCS, 11.2% for C-OBCS and 6.8% for SSM. Overall DFS at ten years was 82.3%, 80.5% for S-BCS, 82.4% for C-OBCS and 90.4% for SSM. At ten years, the OS was 93.8%, 93.0% in S-BCS, 93.3% in C-OBCS and 96.6% in the SSM group. Weighted Kaplan Meier plots showed that SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS (p=0.003) and C-OBCS (p=0.029). DFS in C-OBCS versus S-BCS and the difference in OS was not significant (p=0.264). CONCLUSION: SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS and C-OBCS. The difference in DFS between S-BCS and C-OBCS, and OS between the three groups was not statistically significant. Our study suggests that C-OBCS is a safe alternative to S-BCS and SSM.

The star approach, a surgical approach for skin sparing mastectomy and central lumpectomies.

When preservation of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) is not possible in oncologic breast surgery, the traditional approaches are either a horizontal incision centered on the NAC resulting in visible scars and breast distortion, or a round block with risk of healing difficulties. To address these concerns, the authors propose a star approach technique for skin sparing mastectomies and lumpectomies of central breast tumors. During the oncologic surgery, the NAC is removed with four cutaneous extensions, which can be closed as a cross-shaped scar. The scarring is similar in size to the original NAC diameter and can easily be covered by the NAC reconstruction. This technique offers good exposure during surgery, a good aesthetic result with limited scarring, no breast deformity, correction of breast sagging, and high-quality healing.

Goldilocks Mastectomy: The Middle Road Option for Obese Breast Cancer Patients.

Breast cancer is the predominant cancer affecting females in Australia. With the rising obesity rates, the number of obese breast cancer patients is also rising. Full complex breast reconstruction is known to carry significant risk of complications in obese patients, hence we sought to utilize Goldilocks mastectomy as an alternative middle-ground option between standard mastectomy and complex breast reconstruction. A 63-year-old obese female presented with left nipple inversion. Ultrasonography revealed a 9.7 mm dilated retroareolar duct within the left breast, indicating lobular carcinoma. Subsequent biopsy analysis revealed estrogen/progesterone receptor (ER/PR)-positive cancer with equivocal human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status and a Ki67 index of 10%. Concurrently, a discrete area of conspicuous breast tissue prominence displayed characteristics of invasive ductal carcinoma with similar receptor status but a reduced Ki67 index of less than 5%. Traditional breast reconstruction options were unfavorable due to obesity, prompting consideration of a tailored Goldilocks mastectomy. The procedure was uncomplicated, and follow-up assessments revealed commendable wound healing, alongside the restoration of symmetrical breast contours. Conclusion: This study highlights the significance of Goldilocks mastectomy as an invaluable technique in the comprehensive management of breast cancer, particularly for obese patients characterized by a body mass index (BMI) exceeding 35 and substantial medical comorbidities.

Single-Stage Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Acellular Dermal Matrix after Breast Cancer: Comparative Study and Evaluation of Breast Reconstruction Outcomes.

We evaluate postoperative complications, aesthetic results and satisfaction outcomes in patients with breast cancer after intervening with a skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy with an immediate prosthetic reconstruction with or without a biological mesh. Patients with multifocal breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ with an indication for a mastectomy and cT2 tumors with no response to primary systemic treatment were included, whereas patients aged >75 years, with inflammatory carcinoma, and severe circulatory disorders were excluded. Patients in the control group were reconstructed using a prosthesis, whereas the study group included patients reconstructed using a prosthesis and biological acellular porcine dermal mesh (Strattice™). In both groups, the result was assessed using the BREAST-Q instrument. A total of 51 patients (62 intervened breasts) were included in the study group and 38 patients (41 intervened breasts) in the control group. Implant loss and removal occurred in three patients in the study group (5.9%) and nine patients in the control group (24.3%; p = 0.030). Infections appeared in three patients in the study group (4.8%) and three patients in the control group (7.3%; p = 1.00). Skin necrosis appeared in 5 patients in the study group (12.2%) and 11 patients in the control group (21.6%; p = 0.367). Seroma appeared in five patients in the study group (12.2%) and five patients in the control group (8.1%; p = 0.514). The BREAST-Q questionnaire is a comparison between both groups regarding "satisfaction with breasts after surgery" (p = 0.026), "sexual well-being after intervention" (p = 0.010) and "satisfaction with the information received" (p = 0.049). We have noted a statistically significant decrease in implant loss in women receiving an implant with a biological mesh. A higher satisfaction was observed in patients reconstructed using Strattice™, with statistically significant differences in three items.

Intraoperative ultrasound margin evaluation as a tool to reduce positive superficial margins in nipple and skin sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Intraoperative ultrasound (IOUS) guided conservative surgery has been shown to reduce rates of positive margins in breast cancer. The aim of the study is to evaluate the feasibility of using IOUS to assess superficial/anterior margins in nipple and skin sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) and its impact on reducing rates of positive margins. METHODS: This prospective study includes all breast cancer patients who had an indication for NSM/SSM at our Institution. Superficial margin width was measured by IOUS before surgery and the area marked on the skin. Same measurement was performed afterwards in the mastectomy specimen. Any superficial margin < 5 mm was re-excised intraoperatively following the mark on the skin. RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients were included, 47 patients (79.7%) underwent NSM, and 12 patients (20.3%) a SSM. Of the 59 patients, 23 (38.98%) had margins ≥5 mm and 36 patients (61.02%) had margins of ≤5 mm. Of the 36 patients with superficial margins ≤5 mm, 20 had margins <2 mm, and 6 of them had intraoperative involved superficial margins in final pathology. However, after IOUS-guided re-excision, final pathology showed no involved margins. A 2 mm margin was set as the cut-off point for performing an intraoperative re-excision. IOUS guided re-excisions for intraoperative margins ≤2 mm significantly reduced the risk of close/positive margins in final pathology, p < 0.0001. CONCLUSION: The results showed that IOUS margin evaluation significantly reduced the rate of superficial positive margins in NSM/SSM. It is feasible and effective and may avoid challenging reoperations and/or additional radiation therapy for positive margins.

Recaídas locorregionales tras mastectomías preservadoras y reconstrucción inmediata en mujeres con cáncer de mama / Locoregional relapse after sparing mastectomies and immediate reconstruction in women with breast cancer

Introducción: Durante los últimos años, los cambios culturales de la sociedad actual y la mejora en la valoración del riesgo han incrementado la indicación de las mastectomías en mujeres con cáncer de mama. Diversos estudios han confirmado la seguridad oncológica de la mastectomías preservadoras y reconstrucción inmediata. El objetivo de este estudio es analizar la incidencia de recaídas locorregionales de este procedimiento y su impacto en la reconstrucción y la supervivencia global. Pacientes y métodos: Estudio prospectivo de pacientes con un carcinoma de mama que realizaron una mastectomía preservadora y reconstrucción inmediata. Se analizaron las recaídas locorregionales, el tratamiento de las mismas y la capacidad de preservar la reconstrucción, así como su impacto en la supervivencia. Resultados: El grupo a estudio lo constituyen 271 mujeres con carcinoma mamario tratadas mediante una mastectomía ahorradora de piel y reconstrucción inmediata. El seguimiento medio fue de 7,98 años y durante el mismo se diagnosticaron 18 recaídas locorregionales (6,6%): 72,2% en el colgajo de la mastectomía y 27,8% ganglionares. No se evidenciaron diferencias significativas en las características patológicas del tumor primario entre las pacientes con y sin una recaída locorregional, aunque el porcentaje de mujeres con tumores hormonosensibles fue superior en el grupo sin recaída. Las pacientes con recaída ganglionar presentaban tumores de mayor tamaño (el 80% T2-T3) y el 60% tenían metástasis axilares al diagnóstico vs. 7,7% de las mujeres con recaída en piel (p = 0,047). Todas las pacientes intervenidas de una recaída locorregional preservaron su reconstrucción. La incidencia de metástasis y muertes fue significativamente mayor en las pacientes con una recaída, causando una disminución no significativa de la supervivencia global. (AU)

Introduction: In recent years, cultural changes in today's society and improved risk assessment have increased the indication for mastectomies in women with breast cancer. Various studies have confirmed the oncological safety of sparing mastectomies and immediate reconstruction. The objective of this study is to analyze the incidence of locoregional relapses of this procedure and its impact on reconstruction and overall survival. Patients and methods: Prospective study of patients with breast carcinoma who underwent a sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Locoregional relapses and their treatment and their impact on survival were analyzed. Results: The study group is made up of 271 women with breast carcinoma treated with a skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. The mean follow-up was 7.98 years and during the same 18 locoregional relapses (6.6%) were diagnosed: 72.2% in the mastectomy flap and 27.8% lymph node. There were no significant differences in the pathological characteristics of the primary tumor between patients with and without locoregional relapse, although the percentage of women with hormone-sensitive tumors was higher in the group without relapse. Patients with lymph node relapse had larger tumors (80% T2–T3) and 60% had axillary metastases at diagnosis, compared to 7.7% of women with skin relapse (p = 0.047). All patients operated on for locoregional relapse preserved their reconstruction. The incidence of metastases and deaths was significantly higher in patients with a relapse, causing a non-significant decrease in overall survival. (AU)

A systematic review of oncological outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy is an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy in select patients. Increasing evidence supports its use in the setting of breast cancer, however concerns still exist regarding oncological safety. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes of patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was performed to evaluate oncological outcomes in patients with breast cancer who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy. Five major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane) were searched. The review included all original articles published in English reporting long-term oncological outcomes. 2334 studies were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 17 retrospective studies involving 7107 patients were included. The indication for nipple-sparing mastectomy was invasive carcinoma in 6069 patients (85.4%) and in situ disease in 1038 (14.6%). Median follow up was 48 months (range 25-94). The weighted mean rates of local recurrence and recurrence involving the nipple-areola complex were 5.4% (0.9-11.9) and 1.3% (0-4.9), respectively. The weighted mean distant failure rate was 4.8% (1.5-23.0). Therapeutic nipple-sparing mastectomy is oncologically safe in select patients with breast cancer.

Oncological outcomes after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy of ductal carcinoma in situ: A register-based cohort study of 576 Norwegian women.

BACKGROUND: For Ductal Carcinoma in Situ (DCIS), recurrence is shown to be higher after skin-sparing (SSM) versus simple (SM) mastectomy. This study aimed to compare the two groups recurrence rates, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall (OS) survival. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective register-based cohort study of women operated with SSM (n = 338) or SM (n = 238) for DCIS between 2007 and 2017. Data from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry was used to estimate recurrences rates, DFS and OS. RESULTS: Mean age was 51 and 61 years in the SSM and SM groups, respectively. Median follow-up time was 77 months for SSM (range: 21-152 months) vs 84 months for SM (range: 7-171 months). After five years of follow-up, the overall recurrence rate (OR) was 2.1%; 3.9% for SSM and 0.9% for SM. After ten years, the rates were 3.0%, 6.2% for SSM and still 0.9% for SM. DFS was after ten years 92.2%; 91.8% for SSM, and 92.4% for SM. OS was 95.0%; 97.5% for SSM and 93.3% for SM at ten years. For SSM, involved margins represented a significant risk for recurrence. CONCLUSION: The recurrence rate was higher in the SSM versus the SM group. Whether the difference is due to the operating procedures or underlying risk factors remains unknown. When stratifying for the difference in age, there was no statistical difference in DFS or OS. Involved margins in the SSM group were associated with an increased risk of recurrence.

Mastectomy with one-stage or two-stage reconstruction in breast cancer: analysis of early outcomes and patient's satisfaction.

Aim of this study is to compare early post-operative outcomes and patient's satisfaction after skin-sparing and/or nipple-sparing mastectomy (SSM/SNSM) followed either by breast reconstruction with one-stage prepectoral implantation or two-stage technique for breast cancer (BC) or BRCA1/2 mutation.From January 2018 to December 2021, 96 patients (mean age of 51.12 ± 10.9) underwent SSM/SNSM and were divided into two groups: in group A (65 patients, 67.7%), mastectomy was followed by one-stage reconstruction; in group B (31 patients, 32.3%) by two-stage. Operative time was significantly longer in A vs. B (307.6 ± 95.7 vs. 254.4 ± 90.91; P < 0.05). Previous breast surgery was more common in B vs. A (29.0% vs. 7.7%; P < 0.05), while bilateral surgery was performed more frequently in A vs. B (40% vs. 6.5%; P = 0.001). All SSM/SNSM for BRCA1/2 mutation were followed by immediate prepectoral implantation. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of post-operative complications. At pathology, DCIS and invasive ST forms, such as multicentric/multifocal forms, were detected more frequently in B, while NST type in A (all P < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed improved post-operative satisfaction at BREAST-Q survey in Group A (P = 0.001). Encouraging oncologic outcomes after SSM/SNSM for BC enabled the improvement of breast reconstructive techniques. One-stage reconstruction is characterized by better aesthetic outcomes and by greater patient's satisfaction. When SSM/SNSM is technically difficult to perform, as in multicentric/multifocal forms or previous breast surgery, mastectomy followed by two-stage reconstruction should be considered to achieve a radical surgery.

Locoregional relapse after sparing mastectomies and immediate reconstruction in women with breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, cultural changes in today's society and improved risk assessment have increased the indication for mastectomies in women with breast cancer. Various studies have confirmed the oncological safety of sparing mastectomies and immediate reconstruction. The objective of this study is to analyze the incidence of locoregional relapses of this procedure and its impact on reconstruction and overall survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Prospective study of patients with breast carcinoma who underwent a sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Locoregional relapses and their treatment and their impact on survival were analyzed. RESULTS: The study group is made up of 271 women with breast carcinoma treated with a skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. The mean follow-up was 7.98 years and during the same 18 locoregional relapses (6.6%) were diagnosed: 72.2% in the mastectomy flap and 27.8% lymph node. There were no significant differences in the pathological characteristics of the primary tumor between patients with and without locoregional relapse, although the percentage of women with hormone-sensitive tumors was higher in the group without relapse. Patients with lymph node relapse had larger tumors (80% T2-T3) and 60% had axillary metastases at diagnosis, compared to 7.7% of women with skin relapse (p = 0.047). All patients operated on for locoregional relapse preserved their reconstruction. The incidence of metastases and deaths was significantly higher in patients with a relapse, causing a non-significant decrease in overall survival. CONCLUSION: Locoregional relapses are a rare event in women with a sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Most patients with locoregional relapse can preserve their initial reconstruction through local resection of the tumor and adjuvant and / or neoadjuvant therapies.

The comparison of effectivity in breast cancer prevention between skin sparing and subcutaneous mastectomy - 20 years of experience.

INTRODUCTION: Breast cancer is the leading cause of neoplasm mortality among women. Several prevention strategies have been implemented to early detect and prevent the cancer occurrence. The most effective protocol includes prevention mastectomy for the high-risk patients. In our study, we have compared the efficacy of subcutaneous mastectomy (SCM) and skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) in long-term follow up. METHODS: We have included 201 female patients who have been treated at our department over the course of 20 years between 2000 and 2019. All the patients were at high risk of developing breast cancer and therefore were indicated for the prophylactic mastectomy. The main indication was the presence of the mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 cluster, however, even in the lack of such mutation, the family history was sufficient for the mastectomy indication. Patients underwent either SCM, SSM or areola sparing mastectomy (ASM), and were allocated to aforementioned groups, respectively. We have collected the data regarding the reconstruction method along with age, weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and presence of predisposing genetic mutations such as BRCA positivity. RESULTS: The patients who underwent SSM compared to those who underwent SCM were of higher age, with higher BMI and body mass. The patients in SSM group had statistically significantly higher BMI than in ASM. There was no difference in efficacy between patients who underwent SSM and SCM. The majority of patients (91.5%) were positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. In our study, only four patients were tested negative for known breast cancer inducing mutation (three in SCM and one in SSM). The most common reconstruction method was an abdominal flap and breast implant. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic mastectomy is a reliable strategy for significantly reducing the number of breast cancer incidence in high-risk patients regardless of the selected method of mastectomy. These operations allow for the subsequent reconstruction with the whole spectrum of reconstructive options.

Suggestion for the omission of post-mastectomy chest wall radiation therapy in patients who underwent skin-sparing/nipple-sparing mastectomy.

AIM: Both skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have been widely adopted. Although postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) can improve clinical outcomes, it can worsen cosmesis following reconstruction. Therefore, identifying risk factors of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) could help de-escalate PMRT after NSM/SSM in patients with pT1-2 disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patients treated with SSM (N = 400) and NSM (N = 156) in patients with pT1-2N0-1 disease between 2009 and 2016. Seventy-four patients received PMRT with 50-50.4 Gy in 25-28 fractions. The Cox proportional hazards model was used to analyze the prognostic factors of IBTR. RESULTS: With a median follow-up of 66.2 months, 17 IBTR events were observed, with 5-year IBTR-free rate of 97.2%. Although only one IBTR was observed after PMRT, there was no statistical difference in the 5-year IBTR-free rate (PMRT vs. no PMRT, 98.6% vs. 97.0%, p = 0.360). Multivariable analyses demonstrated that age ≤45 years and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were adverse features of IBTR. The low-risk group (0 risk factor) showed a better 5-year IBTR-free rate than the high-risk group (≥1 risk factor) (100.0% vs. 95.8%, p = 0.003). In the high-risk group, PMRT slightly improved 5-year IBTR-free rate compared with no PMRT (98.6% vs. 95.2%, p = 0.166). In addition, PMRT increased 5-year cumulative incidence of reconstruction failure (10.0% vs. 2.8%, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: We identified risk factors (age and LVI) related to IBTR following upfront SSM/NSM with pT1-2 disease. As a hypothesis-generating study, de-escalation of PMRT by omitting chest wall irradiation in selective patients could improve reconstruction-related complications without compromising oncologic outcomes.

Autologous vs. implant-based breast reconstruction after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy-A deeper insight considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes.

Introduction: Autologous (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) represent the most common procedures after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy. This cross-sectional study is a comprehensive analysis of ABR and IBR considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes. Patients and methods: Eligible patients underwent breast reconstruction (ABR and IBR) after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy between January 2014 and December 2020. Outcome parameters included quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer - EORTC - QLQ30, BR23, Breast-Q, CES-D), complication rates, aesthetic result, and breast sensitivity. Results: 108 patients participated in the study (IBR: n = 72, age 48.9 ± 9.9 years; ABR: n = 36, age: 46.6 ± 7.3 years). Mean follow-up was 27.1 ± 9.3 (IBR) and 34.9 ± 20.5 (ABR), respectively. IBR patients suffered significantly more often from major complications (30.6% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.01), while ABR patients underwent secondary procedures significantly more often to improve the aesthetic result (55.6% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.004). Unilateral reconstructions revealed superior aesthetic results in ABR (n.s.), while in bilateral reconstruction IBR tended to score higher (n.s.). Scar evaluation resulted in a better result of IBR in both categories (p < 0.01). Breast sensitivity was severely impaired in both groups. The Breast-Q revealed a significantly higher "patient satisfaction with breast" after ABR (p = 0.033), while the other QoL-tests and subscales showed no significant differences between the two procedures. Conclusion: ABR is associated with a higher patient satisfaction despite the high probability of secondary procedures to improve the aesthetic outcome, whereas IBR-patients suffer more often from major complications. Furthermore, the laterality of reconstruction should be included in the individual decision-making process.

Impact of demographic and perioperative risk factors on complication rates in skin-sparing/nipple-sparing mastectomy with implant-based reconstruction using titanized polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP® Bra).

BACKGROUND: Skin/nipple-sparing mastectomies (SSM/NSSM) have been reported to have acceptable complication rates and good aesthetic outcomes with high patient satisfaction. However, in this relatively young and rapidly expanding field of reconstructive plastic surgery, differences in perioperative management are noted between breast centers. Prospective studies of complication rates using a titanized polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP® Bra) are currently lacking. METHODS: A prospective subgroup analysis was performed based on the data set of the prospective, single-arm, multicenter observational study (PRO-BRA). Early complication rates after skin/nipple-sparing mastectomy with implant-based immediate or secondary reconstruction using a titanized polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP® Bra) subpectorally were investigated in relation to demographic factors, as well as intra-and postoperative management. The subgroup consists of 258 patients. Complications were categorised into necrosis, infection, postoperative bleeding or hematoma, seroma, wound healing delays and R1-situations. RESULTS: Early complication rates of SSM/NSSM using titanium-based meshes are comparable to complication-rates using ADM's. Logistic regression shows significantly higher risk for wound healing delays, necrosis and seroma with increasing BMI, abladat- and implant-weight (OR 1,17 -1,66, p-value < 0,001). Smokers have significantly higher necrosis rates (20.7%) compared to non-smokers (5.5%) (p-value = 0.002). Discharge with drainage results in a trend toward higher rates of wound healing complications. CONCLUSION: The use of TiLOOP® Bra meshes was shown to have acceptable complication rates. Complication rates depend on certain demographic and intraoperative risk factors and should be considered in indications and information of patients.

Combined skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction: Outcome following mantle field irradiation versus outcome following whole-breast irradiation.

BACKGROUND: Mastectomy may be needed in the context of previous radiotherapy in cases of breast carcinoma following mantle field radiotherapy for Hodgkin lymphoma or in cases of local relapse or second primary tumours after breast conserving therapy including whole-breast irradiation (BCT). The outcome of combined skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (SSM-IIBR) has been reported to be unfavourable in these cases. PURPOSE: To compare the outcome of SSM-IIBR after mantle field radiotherapy to that after BCT and to compare both to the outcome observed in non-irradiated breasts. METHODOLOGY: The prevalences of short-term events, device loss, long-term corrections and secondary reconstructions, and reversion to autologous tissue techniques of 42 SSM-IIBRs performed after mantle field irradiation were compared to those of 47 salvage SSM-IIBRs following BCT. Both outcomes were compared to the outcome in the contralateral, non-irradiated breast of the subgroup of 23 women in the BCT group. RESULTS: The groups were comparable in terms of patient- and procedure-related risk factors, except for time lapse after previous therapy, intraoperative device weight, and the fraction of immediate use of a definitive implant. The outcome of SSM-IIBR after mantle field irradiation significantly differs favourably from that after BCT. It matches the outcome observed in non-irradiated breasts. CONCLUSION: Skin-sparing mastectomy combined with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction is a fully justifiable option for women who previously underwent mantle field irradiation for Hodgkin lymphoma. We feel that the unfavourable outcome observed in women who previously underwent BCT necessitates an alternative reconstructive modality.