Efficacy of Two-Step Surgery on Severely Protruding Axillary Accessory Breast: First-Step Mammary Gland Excision Followed by Second-Look Redundant Skin Excision.

BACKGROUND

Symptoms of axillary accessory breasts (AABs) vary among patients. Mildly protruding AABs do not require skin excision, whereas severely protruding AABs might. We report a novel technique that includes mammary gland excision followed 6 months later by second-look redundant skin excision, if necessary.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of this two-step surgical approach and compared it with one-step en bloc resection in severely protruding AAB patients.

METHODS

This retrospective study included 834 women who underwent AAB excision during 2017-2019. AABs were classified according to their external appearance: protruding, palpable accessory breast at an obtuse angle (class I) or an acute angle with accompanying skinfold (class II). Class II was further divided according to the excision technique: one-step en bloc resection (n = 36) or two-step resection (n = 42). Patients completed post hoc satisfaction surveys evaluating appearance, axillary pain, and scar, 6 months postoperatively.

RESULTS

There were 204 class II patients and 168 patients who underwent a two-step approach; 42/168 underwent second-look skin excision, and 126/168 underwent one-step gland excision exclusively. The remaining 36 patients underwent one-step resection. Scars measured 4.3 cm in the second-look group versus 6.4 cm in the one-step group (P < 0.000). Overall satisfaction scores were higher in the second-look group versus the one-step group (13.6 vs. 12.3, respectively; P < 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS

For severely protruding AABs, mammary gland excision with skin preservation comprises the first operation, and second-look skin excision can be considered 6 months later. This procedure avoids overtreatment and potentially increases patient satisfaction compared with one-step en bloc excision.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

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.