Investigating the Severity of Complications following Mastectomy and Prepectoral Implant-Based versus Autologous Reconstruction.

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Several clinical studies have reported autologous breast reconstruction (ABR) to be associated with a higher postoperative complication rate; however, few have investigated the impact of reconstructive modality on complication severity. This study examines the impact of reconstructive modality on complication severity in a matched cohort of patients who underwent ABR versus implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: A retrospective study of patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction was performed. Propensity score matching ensured adequate matching of patients who underwent ABR and staged prepectoral IBR, respectively. Patient demographics, breast measurements, and postoperative outcomes (including the incidence and severity of complications) were analyzed. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: One hundred twenty-eight patients (214 breast reconstructions) were included for analysis (ABR, n = 64; IBR, n = 64). No difference in overall complication rate was noted ( P = 0.61). However, a significant association of IBR with major complications was noted ( P = 0.02). In contrast, minor complications were significantly more frequent following ABR ( P = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Although the reconstructive modality did not appear to have an effect on the overall complication rate, it did significantly affect the severity of postoperative complications, with major and minor complications being associated with IBR and ABR, respectively. These findings are relevant to patient-centered decision-making, as they provide further granularity regarding postoperative complications and address the issue of complication severity. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic, III.