Department of Plastic Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Kayisdagi Caddesi, No:32 Atasehir, 34752, Istanbul, Turkey.
Department of General Surgery, Acibadem Mehmet Ali Aydinlar University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey.
Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2021 Jun;45(3):956-967. doi: 10.1007/s00266-020-02000-w. Epub 2020 Oct 23.
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction are becoming preferred options with improved outcomes. However, reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breasts is challenging. When mastectomy and skin reduction are combined in a single-staged procedure, the vasculature of the skin is disturbed leading to increased complication rates. This paper aims to compare complication rates of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with or without reduction to determine the safety of reduction in this patient group.
Breast cancer patients that underwent NSM and implant-based immediate breast reconstruction between November 2010 and 2018 were analyzed. All implants were placed submuscularly. Patients with skin reduction and nipple-areolar complex transposition were matched in a 1:1 fashion with patients without reduction.
There were 50 patients (72 procedures) in each group. Demographics of the groups were similar as a part of matching process. Mean implant volume in the reduction group was higher (399.93 ± 97.54 vs. 360.21 ± 82.54, p = 0.009). Full thickness skin necrosis rate was higher in the reduction group [12/72 (%17) vs. 2/72 (3%), p = 0.009], and the most common site was over the suture line [6/12 (50%)]. Complications in the reduction group were more common in reconstructions with implant volumes greater than 500 cc (p = 0.008).
When compared with no reduction, the skin necrosis rate of NSM and immediate implant-based reconstruction with skin reduction is higher. The described technique can only be considered in patients with moderate breast volumes, grade II-III ptosis, and when the planned implant volume is low (< 500 cc).
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 .
保留乳头的乳房切除术(NSM)和基于植入物的即刻乳房重建已成为首选方法,且具有更好的效果。然而,对于大乳房和乳房下垂的患者,重建是具有挑战性的。当乳房切除术和皮肤减少术在一个单一阶段的手术中联合进行时,皮肤的血管会受到干扰,导致并发症发生率增加。本文旨在比较 NSM 和即刻基于植入物的重建术是否联合或不联合减少术的并发症发生率,以确定在该患者群体中减少术的安全性。
分析了 2010 年 11 月至 2018 年间接受 NSM 和即刻基于植入物的乳房重建的乳腺癌患者。所有植入物均置于胸肌下。接受皮肤减少术和乳头乳晕复合体转位的患者与未接受减少术的患者以 1:1 的比例匹配。
每组有 50 名患者(72 例手术)。作为匹配过程的一部分,两组的人口统计学特征相似。减少组的平均植入物体积更高(399.93 ± 97.54 vs. 360.21 ± 82.54,p = 0.009)。减少组的全层皮肤坏死率更高[12/72(17%)vs. 2/72(3%),p = 0.009],最常见的部位是缝线上方[6/12(50%)]。减少组的并发症在植入物体积大于 500cc 的重建中更为常见(p = 0.008)。
与不减少相比,保留乳头的乳房切除术和即刻基于植入物的重建联合皮肤减少术的皮肤坏死率更高。只有在中等乳房体积、II-III 度下垂和计划植入物体积较低(<500cc)的患者中,才能考虑使用这种技术。
IV。本刊要求作者为每篇文章指定一个证据等级。如需更全面地了解这些循证医学等级,请参考目录或在线作者指南(www.springer.com/00266)。