-
Free Tissue Transfer for Reconstruction After Bilateral Skin Sparing Mastectomy-A Systematic Review.Annals of Plastic Surgery Apr 2024Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignant neoplasia in females worldwide. Overall survival and patients' choice for bilateral mastectomy have increased. It...
BACKGROUND
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed malignant neoplasia in females worldwide. Overall survival and patients' choice for bilateral mastectomy have increased. It is therefore important to offer breast reconstructive procedures to improve patient quality of life and self-esteem. The aim of this systematic literature review is to quantify the outcome and sustainability of bilateral breast reconstruction using autologous, vascularized free tissue transfer.
METHODS
A systematic literature review of PubMed, Cochrane, and the Web of Science databases was performed. A total of 5879 citations were identified, and 12 studies met the inclusion criteria.
RESULTS
A total of 1316 patients were included, with a mean age of 47.2 years. Overall, 32.5% of patients experienced a complication after breast reconstruction. If reported, 7.45% of patients experienced major complications, while 20.7% had minor complications.The following flaps were used for breast reconstruction, in order of reducing frequency: DIEP (45.45%), TRAM (22.73%), SIEA (9.09%), SGAP (9.09%), TUG (4.55%), TMG (4.55%), and LD/MLD (4.55%).
CONCLUSIONS
Current studies indicate that bilateral breast reconstruction using autologous, vascularized free tissue transfer is a safe procedure for postmastectomy reconstruction and offers stable long-term results. This is particularly in comparison to implant-based breast reconstruction.
Topics: Female; Humans; Middle Aged; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms; Quality of Life; Mammaplasty; Surgical Flaps; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 38470816
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003828 -
Acta Chirurgiae Plasticae 2024The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is widely considered as the gold standard in breast reconstruction. The inset technique of the DIEP flap is crucial...
INTRODUCTION
The deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is widely considered as the gold standard in breast reconstruction. The inset technique of the DIEP flap is crucial in determining the overall aesthetic outcome; however, to date no systematic review is available that comprehensively assesses the various techniques. Evaluation of topic: A systematic review was performed according to the PRISMA guidelines. The methodology is outlined within our published protocol (Prospero CRD42023449477). Included articles met a minimal criterion compromising of the intervention (DIEP free flap for breast reconstruction) and outcomes (aesthetic and clinical outcomes). Six articles were included in this review, with a total of 346 patients and a follow-up ranging from 6 months to 4 years. Four articles were of a prospective case series study design, one article was a randomized controlled trial, and one article was a case-control study. The risk of bias was assessed to be high in the case series, but low and moderate in the randomized controlled trial and case-control study respectively.
CONCLUSION
Although limited by the quality of the evidence, the single aesthetic unit principle, dual-plane inset, elimination of the need for a skin paddle, appropriate flap positioning and rotation, and algorithmic in-setting may all improve the aesthetic outcome of DIEP free flaps.
Topics: Female; Humans; Epigastric Arteries; Esthetics; Mammaplasty; Perforator Flap
PubMed: 38704231
DOI: 10.48095/ccachp202410 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jan 2024Breast reconstruction (BR) is routinely offered to restore symmetry after mastectomy for breast cancer. Not all women, however, may want reconstructive surgery. A... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Breast reconstruction (BR) is routinely offered to restore symmetry after mastectomy for breast cancer. Not all women, however, may want reconstructive surgery. A contralateral mastectomy (CM) to achieve "flat symmetry" can be an excellent alternative, but surgeons are often reluctant to offer this procedure. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding the outcomes of CM as the first step to developing guidelines in this area.
METHODS
PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to identify primary research studies, published in English between 1 January 2000 and 30 August 2022, evaluating clinical or patient-reported outcomes for women who underwent a CM without reconstruction after a mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer. Simple descriptive statistics summarized quantitative data, and content analysis was used for qualitative data.
RESULTS
The study included 15 studies (13 quantitative, 1 qualitative, and 1 mixed-methods) evaluating outcomes for at least 1954 women who underwent a bilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (BM) after unilateral breast cancer. The risk of surgical complications after BM was higher than after unilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (UM) but significantly less than after BR. Satisfaction with the decision for BM was high in all the studies. Key themes relating to flat denial, stigma, and gender-based assumptions were identified.
CONCLUSION
Women electing to undergo BM reported high levels of satisfaction with their decision and complication rates similar to those for UM. Further study is needed to comprehensively explore the outcomes for women seeking BM, but these data should give surgeons confidence to offer the procedure as an alternative option for symmetry after unilateral mastectomy for breast cancer.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022353689).
Topics: Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms; Unilateral Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy, Simple
PubMed: 37749407
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14294-6 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jun 2024
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Female; Postoperative Complications; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Mammaplasty; Transgender Persons
PubMed: 38810155
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010922 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Mar 2024Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) can be performed using a variety of biological and synthetic meshes. However, there has yet to be a consensus on the optimal... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) can be performed using a variety of biological and synthetic meshes. However, there has yet to be a consensus on the optimal mesh. This study investigates the safety and patient satisfaction of using TiLOOP® Bra in IBBR and compares its postoperative complication risk with that of porcine acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and SERAGYN® BR.
METHODS
The literature review was performed via PRISMA criteria, 23 studies met the inclusion criteria for the TiLOOP® Bra review, and 5 studies met the inclusion criteria for the meta-analysis. Patient characteristics and per-breast complications were collected. Data were analyzed using Cochrane RevMan and IBM SPSS.
RESULTS
In 3175 breasts of 2685 patients that underwent IBBR using TiLOOP® Bra, rippling was observed as the most common complication, followed by seroma and capsular contracture. No significant difference in the overall complication rate between pre- and sub-pectoral IBBR using TiLOOP® Bra. However, the meta-analysis showed that the TiLOOP® Bra group had significantly lower odds of implant loss, seroma, wound dehiscence, and the need for reoperation or hospitalization than the ADM group. Additionally, the TiLOOP® Bra group had a significantly lower seroma rate compared to the SERAGYN® BR group, while the other outcome indicators were similar between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
TiLOOP® Bra has become increasingly popular in IBBR in recent years. This review and meta-analysis support the favorable safety profile of TiLOOP® Bra reported in the current literature. The meta-analysis revealed that TiLOOP® Bra has better safety than ADM and a comparable risk of complications compared to SERAGYN® BR. However, as most studies had low levels of evidence, further investigations are necessary.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
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 .
Topics: Animals; Female; Humans; Acellular Dermis; Breast Implantation; Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Polypropylenes; Postoperative Complications; Retrospective Studies; Seroma; Surgical Mesh; Swine; Titanium; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 37464216
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-023-03500-1 -
International Journal of Molecular... Mar 2024There is extensive coverage in the existing literature on implant-associated lymphomas like anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, but breast implant-associated squamous cell... (Review)
Review
There is extensive coverage in the existing literature on implant-associated lymphomas like anaplastic large-cell lymphoma, but breast implant-associated squamous cell carcinoma (BIA-SCC) has received limited scholarly attention since its first case in 1992. Thus, this study aims to conduct a qualitative synthesis focused on the underexplored association between breast implants and BIA-SCC. A systematic review was conducted utilizing the PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases to identify all currently reported cases of BIA-SCC. Additionally, a literature review was performed to identify potential biochemical mechanisms that could lead to BIA-SCC. Studies were vetted for quality using the NIH quality assessment tool. From an initial pool of 246 papers, 11 met the quality criteria for inclusion, examining a total of 14 patients aged between 40 and 81 years. BIA-SCC was found in a diverse range of implants, including those with smooth and textured surfaces, as well as those filled with saline and silicone. The condition notably manifested a proclivity for aggressive clinical progression, as evidenced by a mortality rate approximating 21.4% within a post-diagnostic interval of six months. Our literature review reveals that chronic inflammation, driven by various external factors such as pathogens and implants, can initiate carcinogenesis through epigenetic modifications and immune system alterations. This includes effects from exosomes and macrophage polarization, showcasing potential pathways for the pathogenesis of BIA-SCC. The study highlights the pressing need for further investigation into BIA-SCC, a subject hitherto inadequately addressed in the academic sphere. This necessitates the urgency for early screening and intervention to improve postoperative outcomes. While the review is confined by its reliance on case reports and series, it serves as a valuable reference for future research endeavors.
Topics: Humans; Adult; Middle Aged; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Female; Breast Implants; Breast Implantation; Mammaplasty; Breast Neoplasms; Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic
PubMed: 38474119
DOI: 10.3390/ijms25052872 -
Journal of Plastic Surgery and Hand... Jan 2024There are several techniques for reconstructing breasts after mastectomy, but little scientific evidence for which technique is superior. The aim of this systematic...
BACKGROUND
There are several techniques for reconstructing breasts after mastectomy, but little scientific evidence for which technique is superior. The aim of this systematic review was to compare the cost-effectiveness of implant-based and autologous reconstruction and to evaluate the overall certainty of evidence, as well as the quality of reporting of the included studies.
METHODS
Studies investigating the cost-effectiveness of breast reconstruction with a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap compared to implant-based reconstruction, meeting criteria defined in a PICO (population, intervention, comparison, and outcome), were included. Medline, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane library, CinahL, EconLit, and NHS EED databases were searched. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach was used to assess the certainty of evidence, and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standard (CHEERS) 2022 was used to evaluate the quality of reporting.
RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
A total of 256 abstracts were retrieved from the search, and after scrutiny, seven studies were included. The findings of this present systematic review should be interpreted with caution as the overall certainty of evidence is low (GRADE ƟƟОО). The included studies suggest that DIEP-flaps are cost-effective compared with implant-based breast reconstruction when the applied cost-effectiveness thresholds of $50,000 to $100,000 per quality-adjusted life years are used. It is noteworthy that no high level evidence exists regarding cost-effeciency, to support recommendations and decision in breast reconstruction. Methodological issues that can be improved in future studies are presented.
Topics: Cost-Benefit Analysis; Databases, Factual; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Perforator Flap; Humans
PubMed: 38189784
DOI: 10.2340/jphs.v59.19649 -
Annales de Chirurgie Plastique Et... Mar 2024Polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAAG) is a filler that has been strictly prohibited in France for many years. It first appeared on the market in 1980, used as an injectable for...
Polyacrylamide hydrogel (PAAG) is a filler that has been strictly prohibited in France for many years. It first appeared on the market in 1980, used as an injectable for breast and facial augmentation, mainly in Asia and Eastern Europe. Like many other materials, it has shown unfavourable results and complications due to a foreign body reaction. It was banned in 2006, but continues to be injected illegally. With the influx of migrants, we are faced with the problem of how to manage complications, which can occur more than a decade later. We report our experience of a recent case in our department that required complete removal of the product and iterative lipofilling, with a result that remains sub-optimal, and we systematically review the literature.
Topics: Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Breast; Acrylic Resins; Injections
PubMed: 37741804
DOI: 10.1016/j.anplas.2023.09.005 -
Annals of Plastic Surgery Jun 2024Breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is the current gold-standard autologous option. The profunda artery perforator (PAP) and...
INTRODUCTION
Breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is the current gold-standard autologous option. The profunda artery perforator (PAP) and lumbar artery perforator (LAP) flaps have more recently been described as alternatives for patients who are not candidates for a DIEP flap. The aim of this study was to review the survival and complication rates of PAP and LAP flaps, using the DIEP flap as a benchmark.
METHODS
A literature search was conducted using PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, BIOSIS, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases. Papers were screened by title and abstract, and full texts reviewed by three independent blinded reviewers. Quality was assessed using MINORS criteria.
RESULTS
Sixty-three studies were included, for a total of 745 PAP, 62 stacked PAP, 187 LAP, and 23,748 DIEP flap breast reconstructions. The PAP (98.3%) had comparable success rate to DIEP (98.4%), and the stacked PAP (88.7%) and LAP (92.5%) success rate was significantly lower (P < 0.0001). The PAP and LAP groups both had a low incidence of fat necrosis. However, the revision rate for the LAP group was 16.1% whereas the PAP group was 3.3%. Donor site wound dehiscence rate was 2.9 in the LAP group and 9.1% in the PAP group.
CONCLUSIONS
Profunda artery perforator and DIEP flaps demonstrate very high rates of overall survival. The LAP flap has a lower survival rate. This review highlights the survival and complication rates of these alternative flaps, which may help clinicians in guiding autologous reconstruction technique when a DIEP flap is unavailable.
Topics: Humans; Mammaplasty; Perforator Flap; Female; Graft Survival; Postoperative Complications; Epigastric Arteries
PubMed: 38768024
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000003916 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Jan 2024
Meta-Analysis
Topics: Humans; Female; Mammaplasty; Breast Implantation; Postoperative Complications; Breast Neoplasms; Breast Implants; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37193889
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-023-03370-7