Should immediate breast reconstruction be performed in the setting of radiotherapy? An ethical analysis.

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) combined with post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is associated with an increased risk for complications. Here, we analyse whether IBR combined with PMRT is ethically acceptable. We employ normative analysis following reflective equilibrium and the principles of Beauchamp and Childress: non-maleficence, beneficence, autonomy, and justice. From the perspective of beneficence and non-maleficence, we can choose either IBR or PMRT according to documented risks and complications, delayed autologous breast reconstruction with corresponding benefits but less risk for complications, or even no reconstruction, which for some women, might be equally beneficial. In such a situation, given the level of severity associated with lacking a breast after mastectomy, IBR violates the principles of beneficence and non-maleficence. To deny an IBR in the context of PMRT does not violate the principle of autonomy as it is normally interpreted in the healthcare system, not even when patient-centred care is taken into consideration. Moreover, there is a risk that the decision of the patient will be affected by heuristics, optimism bias, and surgeon bias. IBR in the context of PMRT could be in conflict with the principle of justice, as it could lead to displacement of care for other patient groups. Furthermore, an acceptable level of cost effectiveness should be low, given that living without a breast is a condition of moderate severity. In conclusion, given the current knowledgebase and established ethical norms within the healthcare system, we find strong ethical reasons not to offer IBR when PMRT is expected.

What Should Be the Role of Plastic Surgeons in Nonanatomic Breast Reconstruction, including Tattooing?

The goal of plastic surgeons performing postmastectomy anatomic reconstruction is to create a breast structure that closely matches the shape and appearance of a patient's native breast. Tattoo artists have helped improve outcomes with nipple-areolar tattooing. Some patients now prefer to have more extensive, nonanatomic designs to help camouflage their scars. Two questions are considered here: What role should plastic surgeons have in supporting or performing nonanatomic reconstruction? And should insurance programs cover nonanatomic breast reconstruction options?

How Tattoos Can Complement Breast Reconstruction.

Tattooing offers expanded possibilities for creative expression for women who have undergone mastectomies and breast reconstruction surgeries. Tattoo techniques for areola restoration, such as repigmentation, do not address breast asymmetry or heavy scarring, but breast tattoos can embolden a woman's sexuality, self-confidence, and sense of body reclamation, as well as strengthen her postsurgical capacity for relating to her breasts and expressing her identity. There are many factors involved when a tattoo artist is asked to design an image for a patient. This article describes how I apply my artistic and trade talent to help mastectomy patients creatively reach beyond the limitations of surgical reconstruction possibilities.

Making decisions about breast reconstruction: A systematic review of patient-reported factors influencing choice.

PURPOSE: Many studies have explored women's reasons for choosing or declining a particular type of breast reconstruction (BR) following mastectomy for breast cancer. This systematic review synthesises women's reasons for choosing a range of BR options, including no BR, in different settings and across time. METHODS: Thirteen databases were systematically searched, with 30 studies (4269 participants), meeting the selection criteria. Information on study aim and time frame, participation rate, design/methods, limitations/bias, reasons and conclusions, as well as participant clinical and demographic information, was reported. An overall quality score was generated for each study. Reasons were grouped into eight domains. RESULTS: While study methodology and results were heterogeneous, all reported reasons were covered by the eight domains: Feeling/looking normal; Feeling/looking good; Being practical; Influence of others; Relationship expectations; Fear; Timing; and Unnecessary. We found a strong consistency in reasons across studies, ranging from 52% of relevant publications citing relationship expectations as a reason for choosing BR, up to 91% citing fear as a reason for delaying or declining BR. Major thematic findings were a lack of adequate information about BR, lack of genuine choice for women and additional access limitations due to health system barriers. CONCLUSIONS: Understanding women's reasons for wanting or not wanting BR can assist clinicians to help women make choices most aligned with their individual values and needs. Our thematic findings have equity implications and illustrate the need for surgeons to discuss all clinically appropriate BR options with mastectomy patients, even if some options are not available locally.

Medical tourism in plastic surgery: ethical guidelines and practice standards for perioperative care.

BACKGROUND: The goal of this review was to identify the safety and medical care issues that surround the management of patients who had previously undergone medical care through tourism medicine. Medical tourism in plastic surgery occurs via three main referral patterns: macrotourism, in which a patient receives treatments abroad; microtourism, in which a patient undergoes a procedure by a distant plastic surgeon but requires postoperative and/or long-term management by a local plastic surgeon; and specialty tourism, in which a patient receives plastic surgery from a non-plastic surgeon. METHODS: The ethical practice guidelines of the American Medical Association, International Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, American Society of Plastic Surgeons, and American Board of Plastic Surgeons were reviewed with respect to patient care and the practice of medical tourism. CONCLUSIONS: Safe and responsible care should start prior to surgery, with communication and postoperative planning between the treating physician and the accepting physician. Complications can arise at any time; however, it is the duty and ethical responsibility of plastic surgeons to prevent unnecessary complications following tourism medicine by adequately counseling patients, defining perioperative treatment protocols, and reporting complications to regional and specialty-specific governing bodies. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE V: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266.

An analysis of the motivating and risk factors for conversion from implant-based to total autologous breast reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Problems with implant-based breast reconstructions can lead to patient dissatisfaction and a request for total autologous reconstruction. This 12-year study aimed to determine the rate of conversion from implant-based to autologous reconstruction, to identify potential risk factors, compare the rate of conversion in implant-only and latissimus dorsi/implant reconstructions, and assess patient satisfaction following conversion. METHODS: Implant-based reconstructions performed between 2000 and 2008 were reviewed. The cohort was then followed prospectively until 2012. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine implant-based reconstructions were performed in 118 patients. Sixty-nine patients underwent latissimus dorsi/implant (80 breasts) and 49 underwent implant-only reconstructions (59 breasts). Twenty-one underwent bilateral reconstructions following risk-reduction surgery. Sixteen percent (19 of 118) of patients and 14 percent of breasts (19 of 139) underwent conversion to autologous tissue. None of the 21 bilateral cases converted (hazard ratio, 4.6; p < 0.05). Median time to conversion was 64 months (range, 18 to 142 months). The main motivating factors for conversion included poor aesthetic result (36.8 percent), capsular contracture (31.6 percent), change in weight (21.1 percent), and implant infection/extrusion (10.5 percent). Implant-only reconstructions were more likely to convert (hazard ratio, 3.6; p < 0.05) and at an earlier stage (p < 0.05) than latissimus dorsi/implant reconstructions. Neither radiotherapy (p = 0.68) nor capsular contracture (p = 0.94) significantly increased the risk of conversion. The BREAST-Q demonstrated high patient satisfaction after conversion. CONCLUSIONS: Autologous tissue conversion offers a definitive means of improving the quality of the result, patient satisfaction, and quality of life in troublesome implant-based breast reconstructions. Latissimus dorsi coverage of implants and bilateral reconstructions appear to be protective. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, III.

Trends in autologous fat grafting to the breast: a national survey of the american society of plastic surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat grafting has been gaining popularity in recent years, although there remains concern regarding the safety and efficacy of the practice for breast surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine national trends for fat grafting to the breast and to establish the frequency and specific techniques of the procedure to provide more supportive data. METHODS: A questionnaire was e-mailed to 2584 members of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Variables included prevalence and applications of fat grafting to the breast. Components of the fat graft protocol were also assessed. RESULTS: Four hundred fifty-six of the 2584 questionnaires were completed. Sixty-two percent of all respondents reported currently using fat grafting for reconstructive breast surgery and 28% of all respondents reported currently using the practice for aesthetic breast surgery. The most common reason cited by respondents for using fat grafting to the breast was as an adjunctive therapy to implant or flap surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Fat grafting to the breast is a common procedure most often used in reconstructive operations. The increasing prevalence of fat grafting to the breast indicates a need for collection of clinical data and supports the establishment of a national prospective registry to track outcomes after aesthetic and reconstructive applications.

The BREAST-V: a unifying predictive formula for volume assessment in small, medium, and large breasts.

BACKGROUND: Breast volume assessment enhances preoperative planning of both aesthetic and reconstructive procedures, helping the surgeon in the decision-making process of shaping the breast. Numerous methods of breast size determination are currently reported but are limited by methodologic flaws and variable estimations. The authors aimed to develop a unifying predictive formula for volume assessment in small to large breasts based on anthropomorphic values. METHODS: Ten anthropomorphic breast measurements and direct volumes of 108 mastectomy specimens from 88 women were collected prospectively. The authors performed a multivariate regression to build the optimal model for development of the predictive formula. The final model was then internally validated. A previously published formula was used as a reference. RESULTS: Mean (±SD) breast weight was 527.9 ± 227.6 g (range, 150 to 1250 g). After model selection, sternal notch-to-nipple, inframammary fold-to-nipple, and inframammary fold-to-fold projection distances emerged as the most important predictors. The resulting formula (the BREAST-V) showed an adjusted R of 0.73. The estimated expected absolute error on new breasts is 89.7 g (95 percent CI, 62.4 to 119.1 g) and the expected relative error is 18.4 percent (95 percent CI, 12.9 to 24.3 percent). Application of reference formula on the sample yielded worse predictions than those derived by the formula, showing an R of 0.55. CONCLUSIONS: The BREAST-V is a reliable tool for predicting small to large breast volumes accurately for use as a complementary device in surgeon evaluation. An app entitled BREAST-V for both iOS and Android devices is currently available for free download in the Apple App Store and Google Play Store. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic, II.

Surgical results, aesthetic outcome, and patient satisfaction after microsurgical autologous breast reconstruction following failed implant reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: The majority of breast reconstructions are performed using implant material. Implants have some major long-term disadvantages. Long-term implant-related complications and improved microsurgical techniques have led to an increased number of women requesting conversion of their implant breast reconstruction to autologous breast reconstruction. The aim of this study was to evaluate surgical and aesthetic outcome and patient satisfaction after tertiary autologous breast reconstruction. METHODS: Between 2001 and 2007, 42 women underwent 61 tertiary autologous breast reconstructions. Surgical outcome and complications were evaluated. Patient satisfaction was assessed using a study-specific questionnaire. Aesthetic result was rated by an expert panel using standardized photographs. RESULTS: Forty-seven deep inferior epigastric artery perforator, 10 mini-transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous, and four transverse musculocutaneous gracilis flaps were performed. Eight patients required reoperation because of complications (19 percent). Total flap loss did not occur. Nineteen patients underwent one or more additional operations to improve aesthetic outcome. Physical discomfort caused by implants and dissatisfaction with the aesthetic result were the main patient motivations to opt for autologous breast reconstruction. Reduction or disappearance of physical discomfort was noted in the vast majority of patients. Most patients were very satisfied with the aesthetic result (mean, 8 of 10), but the mean panel satisfaction score was lower (7 of 10). However, the panel noted a significant improvement of the aesthetic result after conversion to autologous breast reconstruction (from 5 of 10 to 7 of 10). CONCLUSION: Autologous breast reconstruction after failed implant reconstruction is a technically feasible and reliable procedure that leads to improved physical condition and aesthetic results and a high degree of patient satisfaction.

Limites e possibilidades do exercício da autonomia nas práticas terapêuticas de modificação corporal e alteração da identidade sexual / Limits and possibilities to the exercise on autonomy in therapeutic practices of physical modification and sexual identity alteration

As normas brasileiras condicionam o acesso às modificações corporais para alteração da identidade sexual à confirmação do diagnóstico psiquiátrico de transexualismo - transtorno de identidade de gênero ou sexual -, e o acompanhamento psiquiátrico por dois anos para sua realização. O desconforto com o sexo anatômico e o desejo de a pessoa modificar a genitália para a do sexo oposto é o principal critério definidor do diagnóstico de transexualismo. A cirurgia de transgenitalização é considerada etapa final do tratamento, e vem sendo admitida pela instância judicial como condição necessária para a alteração da identidade sexual legal. O artigo discute o conflito moral entre o sujeito transexual e as normas vigentes em relação ao exercício da autonomia individual nas práticas terapêuticas, aplicando as ferramentas da bioética, a partir da análise dos argumentos utilizados pelas instâncias de saúde e judicial sobre o tema, nos artigos, documentos e decisões judiciais nacionais. Observa-se que houve avanços no acesso aos recursos terapêuticos e legais, mas as limitações e restrições ainda impostas ao exercício da autonomia do/a transexual podem ter efeitos negativos para a saúde e os direitos daqueles não considerados pela norma vigente como "verdadeiros transexuais". Os direitos da pessoa transexual à assistência integral à saúde, inclusive sexual, e ao livre desenvolvimento de sua personalidade são infringidos no momento em que a autonomia do paciente não é adequadamente preservada pelas normas vigentes, convertendo-se os direitos humanos num tipo de dever de a pessoa adequar-se à moralidade sexual dominante.

According to current Brazilian health authority policies, one's access to physical modifications to have his/her sexual identity altered is dependent upon an established psychiatric diagnosis of transsexualism - gender or sexual identity disorder - in addition to two years of psychiatric evaluations, in order to have it come to fruition. The discomfort with his/her sexual anatomy and the desire to have his/her genitalia modified is the defining criteria to the diagnosis of transsexualism. Sex reassignment surgery is considered to be the last step of such a treatment, and it is viewed by the Judiciary as a necessary condition to effect change in the legal sexual identity status of the transsexual person. This paper argues the moral conflict between transsexual issues and current health policies related to one's exercise on autonomy with regard to therapeutic practices. Hence, Bioethics tools are applied to the discussion, due to the result obtained from an analysis of the arguments made by the health authorities and judicial systems, on the subject, through articles, documents, and Brazilian court decisions. Regarding therapeutic and legal access, some advances have been made. However, notwithstanding, limitations and restrictions still being imposed regarding the exercise of the autonomy of the transsexual individual, might have a negative impact on the health and legal rights of those not acknowledged by the current norms as "true transsexuals". The rights of the transsexual individual to a comprehensive healthcare assistance system, including sexually related health issues, as well as the right to the free development of his/her personality are infringed, at the very moment when the patient's autonomy is not duly safeguarded by current health policies, thus making human rights look more like a duty, to which the person must adapt to as the dominant sexual morality.

[Prophylactic mastectomy in hereditary breast cancer--ethical considerations]. / Präventive Mastektomie bei familiärem Brustkrebs--ethische Uberlegungen.

Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy lowers the risk of developing breast cancer in high-risk patients and hereditary breast cancer by more than 95%. Therefore, in selected cases bilateral prophylactic mastectomy represents an effective procedure for breast cancer prevention and, when combined with modern plastic-surgical techniques of breast reconstruction, can achieve good to excellent cosmetic results and high patient satisfaction. Diligent decision making including an accurate determination of the individual risk profile is mandatory. In case of ethical conflicts that may arise in this context, a clinical ethics consultation can be a helpful tool in establishing a sustainable consensus between patient and treating physician.

Safety and aesthetic improvement using the omega pattern reduction mammaplasty after breast conservation surgery and radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND: With the continued popularity of lumpectomy and radiation therapy for many early-stage breast cancer patients, a considerable number of large-breasted patients are being identified who are unhappy with subsequent asymmetry and cosmetic distortion and symptoms related to their macromastia. Bilateral reduction mammaplasty is the most direct means of achieving size balance, improving cosmesis, and relieving symptoms related to macromastia. However, most plastic surgeons are fearful of reduction of the irradiated breast using traditional pedicle techniques for nipple transfer. An alternative procedure intended to minimize this risk is the reduction mammaplasty with an omega incision. METHODS: The omega technique uses a central excision resulting in a moderate resection of skin and breast tissue while elevating the nipple-areola complex. Between 2001 and 2005, the authors used the omega reduction technique in five post-lumpectomy and irradiation patients with resultant large, asymmetric breasts. The volume of excised tissue from the irradiated breast was 250 to 327 g (mean, 291 g). RESULTS: All patients were relieved of their preoperative macromastia symptoms and achieved improved breast symmetry. In addition, there were no wound healing complications, and all women were satisfied with their cosmetic result. CONCLUSIONS: The omega breast reduction technique creates the widest possible pedicle with the least length, thus maximizing blood supply and avoiding the development of more tenuous flaps and a separate nipple pedicle. The authors believe it is a safer technique for the correction of breast asymmetry and improvement in symptomatic macromastia in patients who have previously undergone lumpectomy and radiation therapy.