-
JPRAS Open Dec 2022Mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty are commonly performed procedures in plastic surgery with many variations in incision pattern, pedicle design, and additional support... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty are commonly performed procedures in plastic surgery with many variations in incision pattern, pedicle design, and additional support maneuvers. Aesthetically pleasing on table results are widely accomplished; however, the longevity of the outcome and sustained correction of ptosis or pseudoptosis is not universal. A systematic review of mastopexy and reduction mammaplasty procedures was performed to investigate which techniques provided the greatest long-term correction of ptosis.
METHODS
A broad search of the literature was performed using the PubMed database from inception to December of 2021. Study characteristics, number of patients, number of breasts, technique, outcome, and average follow-up time were extracted for analysis. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale when applicable.
RESULTS
The primary search yielded 1123 articles. After two levels of screening, 24 articles were identified for analysis. This included 16 case series, seven cohort studies, and one randomized controlled study. From these studies, 1235 patients and 2235 breasts were analyzed. The majority of articles reported on a change in the nipple to inframammary fold and sternal notch to nipple distances.
CONCLUSIONS
In the analytical studies, superior and superomedial pedicles tended to provide greater long-term stability than inferior pedicles. Mesh, dermal suspension flaps, and muscular slings showed promise in providing additional support over standard techniques. No single procedure is ideal for all patients; however, this systematic review provides a valuable description of techniques and long-term outcomes to guide surgical planning.
PubMed: 36061406
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpra.2022.05.003 -
The Breast Journal 2022Less than 1% of all breast cancers are diagnosed in males. In females, postmastectomy breast reconstruction is associated with increased patient satisfaction. However,... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Less than 1% of all breast cancers are diagnosed in males. In females, postmastectomy breast reconstruction is associated with increased patient satisfaction. However, there is a paucity of literature describing reconstructive options for postmastectomy deformity in the male chest. The purpose of this systematic review was to evaluate postmastectomy reconstruction outcomes in males with breast cancer.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, and Web of Science were queried for records pertaining to the study question using medical subject heading (MeSH) terms such as "male breast cancer," "mastectomy," and "reconstruction." No limitations were placed on the year of publication, country of origin, or study size. Study characteristics and patient demographics were collected. Primary outcomes of interest included postoperative complications, recurrence rate, and mortality rate.
RESULTS
A total of 11 articles examining 29 male patients with breast cancer who underwent postmastectomy reconstruction were included for analysis. Literature was most commonly available in the form of case reports. The average age was 59.6 +/-11.4 years. Reconstruction methods included fat grafting ( = 1, 3.4%), silicone implants ( = 1, 3.4%), and autologous chest wall reconstruction with local flaps ( = 26, 89.7%). Postoperative complications occurred in two patients (6.8%), including partial nipple necrosis ( = 1) and hypertrophic scarring ( = 1). Of the studies reporting patient satisfaction, all patients were pleased with the aesthetic appearance of their chest.
CONCLUSION
This systematic review revealed the limited availability of research regarding postmastectomy chest reconstruction in males with breast cancer. Nevertheless, the evidence available suggests that reconstruction can restore a patient's body image and, thus, should be regularly considered and discussed with male patients. Larger studies are warranted to further shed light on this population.
Topics: Aged; Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Breast Neoplasms, Male; Female; Humans; Male; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Middle Aged; Postoperative Complications; Surgical Flaps
PubMed: 35711890
DOI: 10.1155/2022/5482261 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Sep 2022: Lipofilling is a commonly performed procedure worldwide for breast augmentation and correction of breast contour deformities. In breast reconstruction, fat grafting... (Review)
Review
: Lipofilling is a commonly performed procedure worldwide for breast augmentation and correction of breast contour deformities. In breast reconstruction, fat grafting has been used as a single reconstructive technique, as well as in combination with other procedures. The aim of the present study is to systematically review available studies in the literature describing the combination of implant-based breast reconstruction and fat grafting, focusing on safety, complications rate, surgical sessions needed to reach a satisfying reconstruction, and patient-reported outcomes. : We adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) throughout the whole review protocol. A systematic review of the literature up to April 2022 was performed using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases. Only studies dealing with implant-based breast reconstruction combined with fat grafting were included. : We screened 292 articles by title and abstract. Only 48 articles were assessed for full-text eligibility, and among those, 12 studies were eventually selected. We included a total of 753 breast reconstructions in 585 patients undergoing mastectomy or demolitive breast surgeries other than mastectomy (quadrantectomy, segmentectomy, or lumpectomy) due to breast cancer or genetic predisposition to breast cancer. Overall, the number of complications was 60 (7.9%). The mean volume of fat grafting per breast per session ranged from 59 to 313 mL. The mean number of lipofilling sessions per breast ranged from 1.3 to 3.2. : Hybrid breast reconstruction shows similar short-term complications to standard implant-based reconstruction but with the potential to significantly decrease the risk of long-term complications. Moreover, patient satisfaction was achieved with a reasonably low number of lipofilling sessions (1.7 on average).
Topics: Adipose Tissue; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Mastectomy, Segmental; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36143908
DOI: 10.3390/medicina58091232 -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery Aug 2021Medical tourism is expanding on a global basis, with patients seeking cosmetic surgery in countries abroad. Little information is known regarding the risks and outcomes... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
Medical tourism is expanding on a global basis, with patients seeking cosmetic surgery in countries abroad. Little information is known regarding the risks and outcomes of cosmetic tourism, in particular, for aesthetic breast surgery. The majority of the literature involves retrospective case series with no defined comparator. We aimed to amalgamate the published data to date to ascertain the risks involved and the outcomes of cosmetic tourism for aesthetic breast surgery on a global basis.
METHODS
A systematic review of PubMed, Google Scholar, EMBASE, the Cochrane library and OVID Medline was conducted using the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-analyses) guidelines. Keywords such as "medical tourism", "cosmetic tourism", "tourism", "tourist", "surgery", "breast" and "outcomes" were used. Seven hundred and seventy-one titles were screened, and 86 abstracts were reviewed leaving 35 full texts. Twenty-four of these met the inclusion criteria and were used to extract data for this systematic review.
RESULTS
One hundred and seventy-one patients partook in cosmetic tourism for aesthetic breast surgery. Forty-nine percent of patients had an implant-based procedure. Other procedures included: mastopexy (n=4), bilateral breast reduction (n=11) and silicone injections (n=2). Two-hundred and twenty-two complications were recorded, common complications included: wound infection in 39% (n=67), breast abscess/ collection in 12% (n=21), wound dehiscence in 12% (n= 20) and ruptured implant in 8% (n=13). Clavien-Dindo classification of the complications includes 88 (51%) IIIb complications with 103 returns to theatre, 2 class IV complications (ICU stay) and one class V death of a patient. Explantation occurred in 39% (n=32) of implant-based augmentation patients.
CONCLUSIONS
Aesthetic breast surgery tourism is popular within the cosmetic tourism industry. However, with infective complications (39%) and return to theatre rates (51%) significantly higher than expected, it is clear that having these procedures abroad significantly increases the risks involved. The high complication rate not only impacts individual patients, but also the home country healthcare systems. Professional bodies for cosmetic surgery in each country must highlight and educate patients how to lower this risk if they do choose to have cosmetic surgery abroad. In this current era of an intra-pandemic world where health care is already stretched, the burden from cosmetic tourism complications must be minimised.
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: Breast Neoplasms; Esthetics; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Medical Tourism; Retrospective Studies; Surgery, Plastic; Tourism; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33876284
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-021-02251-1 -
Medicine Jun 2016Obesity is a risk factor for postoperative morbidity in breast reconstruction. Although existing studies about nonbreast reconstruction are limited, previous research... (Comparative Study)
Comparative Study Meta-Analysis Review
Obesity is a risk factor for postoperative morbidity in breast reconstruction. Although existing studies about nonbreast reconstruction are limited, previous research has demonstrated that obesity is not an important factor in poor outcomes in nonbreast reconstruction. Our study evaluates the effects of obesity on postoperative morbidity in nonbreast reconstruction in comparison to breast reconstruction. A systematic literature review and meta-analysis was performed using Medline, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases. Obesity was extracted for predictor variables and partial, total loss of flap, and complication were extracted for outcome variables. Subgroup analyses were performed according to reconstruction site. The Newcastle-Ottawa scale (NOS) was used to assess the quality of the studies, and the Cochrane risk of bias tool was used. Publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots. The search strategy identified 944 publications. After screening, 19 articles were selected for review. Partial flap loss, total flap loss, and complications in breast reconstruction occurred significantly more often in obese patients in comparison to nonobese patients (OR = 2.479, P = 0.021 for partial loss, OR = 3.083, P = 0.002 for total loss, OR = 2.666, P = 0.001 for complications). In contrast, partial flap loss, total flap loss, and complications in nonbreast reconstruction were not significantly different in obese patients in comparison to nonobese patients (OR = 0.786, P = 0.629 for partial loss, OR = 0.960, P = 0.961 for total loss, and OR = 1.009, P = 0.536 for complications). In contrast to the relationship between obesity and poor outcomes in breast reconstruction, our study suggests the obesity is not a predisposing factor for poor outcomes in nonbreast reconstruction. Long-term studies are needed to confirm these findings.
Topics: Causality; Free Tissue Flaps; Humans; Mammaplasty; Obesity; Postoperative Complications; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Treatment Failure
PubMed: 27368049
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000004072 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Apr 2014The aim of this systematic review was to establish the completeness of reporting of key patient, tumour, treatment, and outcomes information in the randomized-controlled... (Review)
Review
The aim of this systematic review was to establish the completeness of reporting of key patient, tumour, treatment, and outcomes information in the randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) of standard breast-conserving surgery (sBCS) considered to be the 'gold-standard', and to compare this with the reporting of the same key criteria for all published studies of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (oBCS). Pubmed (1966 to 1st April 2013), Ovid MEDLINE (1966 to 1st April 2013), EMBASE (1980 to 1st April 2013), and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Issue 4, 2013) were searched separately for the following terms: (i) 'oncoplastic AND breast AND surgery'; and (ii) 'therapeutic AND mammaplasty'. Only English language and full text articles were reviewed. Following a pilot evaluation of all studies, key reporting criteria were identified. 16 RCTs of sBCS (n = 11,767 patients) were included, and 53 studies met the inclusion criteria for oncoplastic BCS (n = 3236 patients), none of which were RCTs. No study reported all of the criteria identified, with a mean of 64% of key criteria (range, 55-75%) reported in studies of sBCS, and 54% of criteria (range, 10-85%) reported in studies of oBCS. It is therefore evident that there is much room for improvement in the quality of reporting is BCS studies. Standards are proposed to give future studies of BCS a framework for reporting key information and outcomes.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mastectomy, Segmental; Research Design; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 24388734
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2013.12.006 -
BJS Open Nov 2021Therapeutic mammaplasty (TM) is an oncological procedure which combines tumour resection with breast reduction and mastopexy techniques. Previous systematic reviews have...
BACKGROUND
Therapeutic mammaplasty (TM) is an oncological procedure which combines tumour resection with breast reduction and mastopexy techniques. Previous systematic reviews have demonstrated the oncological safety of TM but reporting of critically important outcomes, such as quality of life, aesthetic and functional outcomes, are limited, piecemeal or inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to identify all outcomes reported in clinical studies of TM to facilitate development of a core outcome set.
METHODS
Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched from inception to 5 August 2020. Included studies reported clinical outcomes following TM for adult women. Two authors screened articles independently for eligibility. Data were extracted regarding the outcome definition and classification type (for example, oncological, quality of life, etc.), time of outcome reporting and measurement tools.
RESULTS
Of 5709 de-duplicated records, 148 were included in the narrative synthesis. The majority of studies (n = 102, 68.9 per cent) reported measures of survival and/or recurrence; approximately three-quarters (n = 75, 73.5 per cent) had less than 5 years follow-up. Aesthetic outcome was reported in half of studies (n = 75, 50.7 per cent) using mainly subjective, non-validated measurement tools. The time point at which aesthetic assessment was conducted was highly variable, and only defined in 48 (64.0 per cent) studies and none included a preoperative baseline for comparison. Few studies reported quality of life (n = 30, 20.3 per cent), functional outcomes (n = 5, 3.4 per cent) or resource use (n = 28, 18.9 per cent).
CONCLUSION
Given the oncological equivalence of TM and mastectomy, treatment decisions are often driven by aesthetic and functional outcomes, which are infrequently and inconsistently reported with non-validated measurement tools.
Topics: Adult; Breast Neoplasms; Esthetics; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Quality of Life
PubMed: 34894122
DOI: 10.1093/bjsopen/zrab126 -
Cancer Oct 2022Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision-making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant-based PMBR separately.
METHODS
A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I -statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects.
RESULTS
Fifty-five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02-0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01-0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03-0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00-0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant-based PMBR.
CONCLUSIONS
Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR.
LAY SUMMERY
Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision-making complex. This meta-analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant-based PMBR. Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Transplantation, Autologous
PubMed: 35894936
DOI: 10.1002/cncr.34393 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jul 2023Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has emerged as an alternative procedure for skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Because oncologic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has emerged as an alternative procedure for skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Because oncologic safety appears similar, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complication risks may guide decision-making in individual patients. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to compare PROs and complication rates after NSM and SSM.
METHODS
A systematic literature review evaluating NSM versus SSM was performed using the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies. Primary outcomes were PROs and complications. Studies that evaluated BREAST-Q scores were used to perform meta-analyses on five BREAST-Q domains.
RESULTS
Thirteen comparative studies including 3895 patients were selected from 1202 articles found. Meta-analyses of the BREAST-Q domains showed a significant mean difference of 7.64 in the Sexual Well-being domain ( P = 0.01) and 4.71 in the Psychosocial Well-being domain ( P = 0.03), both in favor of NSM. Using the specifically designed questionnaires, no differences in overall satisfaction scores were found. There were no differences in overall complication rates between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient satisfaction scores were high after both NSM and SSM; however, NSM led to a higher sexual and psychosocial well-being. No differences in complication rates were found. In combination with other factors, such as oncologic treatments, complication risk profile, and fear of cancer recurrence, the decision for NSM or SSM has to be made on an individual basis and only if NSM is considered to be oncologically safe.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Nipples; Quality of Life; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36728484
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010155 -
Annals of Plastic Surgery Apr 2023Given that the use of breast implants for both cosmetic and reconstructive purposes is growing in the United States, an evaluation of factors that may affect the outcome...
Given that the use of breast implants for both cosmetic and reconstructive purposes is growing in the United States, an evaluation of factors that may affect the outcome of breast implant surgery is needed. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the question: Does a personal or family history of autoimmune disease affect outcomes in breast implant surgery? The literature search yielded 2425 records, but after removal of duplicates, abstract screening, and full-text assessment, only 2 studies met the inclusion criteria for the final review. Both studies provided level III evidence and the average Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies score was 16.5 (range, 15-18 of 24), indicating a fair level of evidence overall. This systematic review found no evidence to support that a diagnosis of an autoimmune disease and/or a family history of autoimmune diseases will lead to poor surgical outcomes in breast implant surgery. Further study is warranted.
Topics: Humans; Breast Implants; Breast Implantation; Autoimmune Diseases; Plastic Surgery Procedures; Mastectomy
PubMed: 34117137
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002930