Project description:Comfortable and well-fitting bras are necessary for good quality of life but hard to find for women who undergo reconstruction after breast cancer treatment. This study aimed to provide data to inform bra designs for breast cancer survivors. We measured anatomical distances used in bra design on 3D clinical photographs of patients who underwent unilateral and bilateral implant-based reconstruction to quantify changes after reconstruction relative to the measured values before the person underwent surgery. We performed additional assessments of symmetry before surgery and after reconstruction, and we used regression analyses to identify associations between the measurements and patient characteristics, such as BMI. Overall, almost all measurements changed significantly in implant-based reconstructed breasts relative to native breasts. We highlight several aspects of ergonomic bra design that will be impacted by the changes in anatomical distances. Practitioner summary: Implant-based breast reconstruction surgery changes the breast so that off-the-rack bras are inadequate. This study provides designers with measurement data from women who underwent implant-based reconstruction to inform bra designs for this population. The key factor designers need to account for is the semi-spherical shape of the reconstructed breast.
Project description:BackgroundImmediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is the most commonly performed reconstructive procedure in the UK, but almost one in ten women experience implant loss and reconstructive failure after this technique. Little is known about how implant loss impacts on patients' quality of life. The first phase of the Loss of implant Breast Reconstruction (LiBRA) study aimed to use qualitative methods to explore women's experiences of implant loss and develop recommendations to improve care.MethodsSemistructured interviews were conducted with a purposive sample of women who experienced implant loss after immediate IBBR, performed for malignancy or risk reduction across six centres. Interviews explored decision-making regarding IBBR, and experiences of implant loss and support received. Thematic analysis was used to explore the qualitative interview data. Sampling, data collection and analysis were undertaken concurrently and iteratively until data saturation was achieved.ResultsTwenty-four women were interviewed; 19 had surgery for malignancy and five for risk reduction. The median time between implant loss and interview was 42 (range 22-74) months. Ten women had undergone secondary reconstruction, two were awaiting surgery, and 12 had declined further reconstruction. Three key themes were identified: the need for accurate information about the risks and benefits of IBBR; the need for more information about 'early-warning' signs of postoperative problems, to empower women to seek help; and better support following implant loss.ConclusionImplant loss is a devastating event for many women. Better preoperative information and support, along with holistic patient-centred care when complications occur, may significantly improve the experience and outcome of care.
Project description:BackgroundWhile the trend towards immediate breast reconstruction is growing, data on the long-term outcomes of patients receiving irradiation afterwards are scarce. We retrospectively reviewed the long-term complication rates in patients who received adjuvant radiation therapy after immediate breast reconstruction in our institution.MethodsWe included 134 patients with breast cancer who underwent single-stage immediate breast reconstruction between January 2008 and December 2018. Sixty-eight patients received adjuvant irradiation and 66 patients did not. Autologous tissue, implant-based, and combined (implant and flap) reconstruction were performed in 40, 55, and 39 patients, respectively. Flap and implant complications data were collected. Baker's classification was used to assess capsular contracture.ResultsThe average follow-up was 47 months. Both groups had similar baseline clinical characteristics and treatments received. The irradiated-group had a higher incidence of adjuvant chemotherapy (P<0.01) and a significantly higher rate of grade III/IV capsular contracture (42.1% vs. 26.9%; P=0.004) than that of the non-irradiated group. The median time to the development of capsular contracture was 37 vs. 41 months in the irradiated vs. the non-irradiated group, respectively. There were no differences in the incidence of flap complications between both groups. The only significant risk factor associated with grade III/IV capsular contracture was adjuvant post-mastectomy irradiation. The irradiated group had a higher risk of developing grade III/IV capsular contracture [odds ratio (OR), 4.35; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.55-12.27].ConclusionsPostmastectomy radiotherapy adversely affects implant-based immediate one-stage reconstruction by increasing the rate of moderate to severe capsular contracture but is not associated with flap complications.
Project description:(1) Introduction: In response to patient concerns about breast cancer recurrence, increased use of breast magnetic resonance imaging and genetic testing, and advancements in breast reconstruction techniques, mastectomy rates have been observed to rise over the last decade. The aim of the study is to compare the outcomes of prepectoral and subpectoral implants and long-term, dual-stage resorbable mesh-based breast reconstructions in mutation carriers (prophylactic surgery) and breast cancer patients. (2) Patients and methods: This retrospective, two-center study included 170 consecutive patients after 232 procedures: Prepectoral surgery was performed in 156 cases and subpectoral was performed in 76. (3) Results: Preoperative chemotherapy was associated with more frequent minor late complications (p < 0.001), but not major ones (p = 0.101), while postoperative chemotherapy was related to more frequent serious (p = 0.005) postoperative complications. Postoperative radiotherapy was associated with a higher rate of minor complications (31.03%) than no-radiotherapy (12.21%; p < 0.001). Multivariate logistic regression found complications to be significantly associated with an expander (OR = 4.43), skin-reducing mastectomy (OR = 9.97), therapeutic mastectomy vs. risk-reducing mastectomy (OR = 4.08), and postoperative chemotherapy (OR = 12.89). Patients in whom prepectoral surgeries were performed demonstrated significantly shorter median hospitalization time (p < 0.001) and lower minor complication rates (5.77% vs. 26.32% p < 0.001), but similar major late complication rates (p = 0.915). (4) Conclusions: Implant-based breast reconstruction with the use of long-term, dual-stage resorbable, synthetic mesh is a safe and effective method of breast restoration, associated with low morbidity and good cosmesis. Nevertheless, prospective, multicenter, and long-term outcome data studies are needed to further evaluate the benefits of such treatments.
Project description:BackgroundIn women with large and ptotic breasts who require a mastectomy and immediate, implant-based reconstruction, long flaps pose a high risk for flap ischemia and necrosis. A new trans-vertical incision for skin-reducing mastectomy is described, which reduces the skin envelope and lifts the breast.ObjectivesThe authors sought to describe the new mastectomy access incision and assess its efficacy and safety when followed by immediate implant-based reconstruction.MethodsThis retrospective analysis included 70 consecutive patients (101 breasts) with large and ptotic breasts who underwent a unilateral (n = 39; 55.7%) or bilateral (n = 31; 44.3%), skin-reducing mastectomy utilizing the trans-vertical approach for either breast cancer or risk reduction. All received immediate one- (n = 86; 85.5%) or two-stage (n = 15; 14.5%), implant-based reconstruction utilizing acellular dermal matrix.ResultsMean age was 50.1 years and mean body mass index was 25.6 kg/m2. After a median follow-up of 4.9 years, the number of breasts with minor and major complications was 21 (20.8%) and 26 (25.7%), respectively. The most common major complications were skin-flap necrosis (n = 12; 11.9%) and infection (n = 8; 7.9%). All occurred within 3 months postsurgically. There were 7 cases of capsular contracture (6.9%) and 5 reconstruction failures (5.0%). Higher body mass index (P < 0.01) and breast weight (P < 0.05) were associated with increased complication rates. According to BREAST-Q, 55/64 patients (85.9%) were somewhat or very satisfied with the aesthetic outcome.ConclusionsThe trans-vertical approach is an effective, reproducible, and safe alternative to conventional skin-reducing mastectomy, with favorable aesthetic outcomes, in patients with large and ptotic breasts.Level of evidence: 4
Project description:PurposeThe aim of the study is to evaluate the level of sensible impairment after mastectomy or implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). In addition, factors influencing breast sensibility were evaluated.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed in Maastricht University Medical Center between July 2016 and August 2018. Women with unilateral mastectomy with or without IBBR were included. Objective sensory measurements were performed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. Their healthy breast served as control, using a paired t test. Differences between mastectomy with and without IBBR were evaluated using the independent t test. Linear regression was performed to evaluate the association between patient characteristics on breast sensibility. The paired t test was used to evaluate in which part of the breast the sensibility is best preserved.ResultsFifty-one patients were eligible for inclusion. Sixteen patients underwent IBBR after mastectomy. Twenty-three patients received radiotherapy and 35 patients received chemotherapy. Monofilament values were significantly higher in the operated group compared to the reference group (p < 0.001). Linear regression showed a statistically significant association between IBBR and objectively measured impaired sensation (p = 0.008). After mastectomy, the cutaneous protective sensation is only diminished. After IBBR, it is lost in the majority of the breast. The medial part of the breast was significantly more sensitive than the lateral part in all operated breasts (p < 0.001).ConclusionIBBR has a significantly negative impact on the breast sensibility compared to mastectomy alone. This study shows that the protective sensation of the skin in the breast is lost after IBBR. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the level of sensible impairment after mastectomy or IBBR. More research is necessary to confirm these results.
Project description:BackgroundInfection following implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) represents a major complication, potentially leading to prosthesis removal. However, no clear protocol for its prevention and management exists. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of conservative treatment methods in preventing implant removal and analyze factors responsible for implant loss in the context of prepectoral IBBR.MethodsA single-institution retrospective review chart of patients undergoing immediate prepectoral IBBR for breast cancer between October 2020 and January 2024 was performed. The inclusion criteria were the presence of at least one of the following postoperative complications: seromas, cellulitis, clinically suspected prosthesis infection, and confirmed periprosthetic infection. A comparative analysis between patients with successful conservative treatment (ultrasound-guided aspiration and antibiotic therapy) and patients undergoing implant removal was performed.ResultsA total of 219 immediate prepectoral IBBR cases were identified, 38 of which met inclusion criteria. Implant removal was required in 11 cases, whereas implant retention was achieved in 27 patients with conservative treatment. Implants were invariably removed when bacterial cultures were positive (P < 0.05). Conversely, when pathogens were not identified, the likelihood of implant removal decreased significantly (P < 0.05). Conservative treatment allowed implant salvage in all patients presenting with postoperative seroma alone, without other associated complications (P < 0.05).ConclusionsThis study suggests that when bacterial cultures are positive, implant removal is unavoidable. Conversely, noninfected seromas correlated with implant salvage. Infections from Bacillus pumilus and Corynebacterium pseudodiphtheriticum are reported for the first time.
Project description:BackgroundThe use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) in one-stage immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (BR) may offer advantages over the two-stage expander-to-implant technique, but literature shows conflicting results. The aim of the present study was to compare these two techniques for immediate implant-based BR regarding postoperative complications, aesthetic correction procedures and aesthetic outcome.MethodsThe study was designed as an observational cohort study with 44 participants admitted for immediate implant-based BR at Department of Plastic Surgery, Aarhus University Hospital, Denmark. 21 patients underwent BR with a one-stage direct-to-implant technique using ADM and 23 patients underwent BR with a two-stage expander-to-implant technique. Follow-up time was 2 years.ResultsThe risk of implant loss was equal between groups; one-stage group 16% and two-stage group 17% whereas the risk of implant exchange (but not loss of BR) was 13% in the one-stage group compared to 7% in the two-stage group. The risk of at least one major complication were equal between groups; 28% and 24% but the risk of at least one minor complication was significantly higher in the two-stage group (41%) compared to the one-stage group (3%). Number of aesthetic corrections were equally frequent in the two treatment groups (one-stage group 1.8, two-stage group 1.5). Patient and investigator assessed aesthetic outcome was very high in both groups as well as the degree of symmetry between breasts. No capsular contracture Baker grade 3 or 4 was observed.ConclusionsThe present study design sets limitations for drawing wide conclusions. This study did not reveal any significant differences between the two breast reconstructive techniques besides a higher risk of minor complications in the two-stage group, that did, however, not lead to a higher risk of implant loss. With equally high satisfaction with the aesthetic result and no significant difference in number of aesthetic corrections between the two groups we suggest, that the one-stage approach using ADM may be feasible and allows the patient to achieve an implant-based BR with a minimum of surgeries and outpatient visits. The study was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04209010).
Project description:BackgroundPrepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) has recently been introduced to reduce postoperative pain and improve cosmetic outcomes in women having implant-based procedures. High-quality evidence to support the practice of PPBR, however, is lacking. Pre-BRA is an IDEAL stage 2a/2b study that aimed to establish the safety, effectiveness, and stability of PPBR before definitive evaluation in an RCT. The short-term safety endpoints at 3 months after surgery are reported here.MethodsConsecutive patients electing to undergo immediate PPBR at participating UK centres between July 2019 and December 2020 were invited to participate. Demographic, operative, oncology, and complication data were collected. The primary outcome was implant loss at 3 months. Other outcomes of interest included readmission, reoperation, and infection.ResultsSome 347 women underwent 424 immediate implant-based reconstructions at 40 centres. Most were single-stage direct-to-implant (357, 84.2 per cent) biological mesh-assisted (341, 80.4 per cent) procedures. Conversion to subpectoral reconstruction was necessary in four patients (0.9 per cent) owing to poor skin-flap quality. Of the 343 women who underwent PPBR, 144 (42.0 per cent) experienced at least one postoperative complication. Implant loss occurred in 28 women (8.2 per cent), 67 (19.5 per cent) experienced an infection, 60 (17.5 per cent) were readmitted for a complication, and 55 (16.0 per cent) required reoperation within 3 months of reconstruction.ConclusionComplication rates following PPBR are high and implant loss is comparable to that associated with subpectoral mesh-assisted implant-based techniques. These findings support the need for a well-designed RCT comparing prepectoral and subpectoral reconstruction to establish best practice for implant-based breast reconstruction.