Nation-wide validation of a multicenter risk model for implant loss following implant-based breast reconstruction.

INTRODUCTION: Implant loss following breast reconstruction is a devastating complication, which should be prevented as much as possible. This study aimed to validate a previously developed multicenter risk model for implant loss after implant-based breast reconstructions, using national data from the Dutch Breast Implant Registry (DBIR). METHODS: The validation cohort consisted of patients who underwent a mastectomy followed by either a direct-to-implant (DTI) or two-stage breast reconstruction between September 2017 and January 2021 registered in the DBIR. Reconstructions with an autologous adjunctive and patients with missing data on the risk factors extracted from the multicenter risk model (obesity, smoking, nipple preserving procedure, DTI reconstruction) were excluded. The primary outcome was implant loss. The predicted probability of implant loss was calculated using beta regression coefficients extracted from the multicenter risk model and compared to the observed probability. RESULTS: The validation cohort consisted of 3769 reconstructions and implant loss occurred after 307 reconstructions (8.1%). Although the observed implant loss rate increased when the risk factors accumulated, the predicted and observed probabilities of implant loss did not match. Of the four risk factors in the multicenter risk model, only obesity and smoking were significantly associated to implant loss. CONCLUSION: The multicenter risk model could not be validated using nationwide data of the DBIR and is therefore not accurate in Dutch practice. In the future, the risk model should be improved by including other factors to provide a validated tool for the preoperative risk assessment of implant loss.

An analysis of complication rates and the influence on patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcomes following oncoplastic breast surgery.

INTRODUCTION: This study aimed to evaluate complication rates, patient satisfaction, and cosmetic outcomes after oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPS). Furthermore, outcome differences between volume displacement and volume replacement techniques and the effect of postoperative complications on outcomes were evaluated. METHODS: This was a prospective single-center study addressing patients who underwent OPS from 2017 to 2020. The BREAST-Q was used to measure patient satisfaction, and cosmetic outcomes were assessed by patient self-evaluation and panel evaluation based on medical photographs. RESULTS: A total of 75 patients were included. The overall complication rate was 18.7%, of which 4% required invasive interventions. Median BREAST-Q scores ranged from 56 to 100 and cosmetic outcomes were scored good to excellent in 60-86%. No differences in complications were observed between volume replacement and volume displacement techniques. Following volume displacement techniques, patients-reported higher BREAST-Q scores for the domain "physical well-being of the chest" and lower cosmetic outcomes scores for "mammary symmetry." Patients with complications scored significantly lower on several domains of the BREAST-Q and in various cosmetic outcome categories. CONCLUSION: In this cohort, an overall complication rate of 18.7% was observed. Patients were generally satisfied, and most cosmetic outcomes were good to excellent. Volume displacement or replacement techniques were performed for different indications and generally showed comparable results. Expected differences in physical discomfort and symmetry between both techniques were observed. In addition, the occurrence of complications resulted in lower patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcomes. These findings emphasize the importance of thorough preoperative counselling.