Drain-free mastectomy and flap fixation: The interim analysis of a randomized controlled noninferiority trial.

INTRODUCTION: Flap fixation after mastectomy has proven to be one of the most promising solutions to reduce seroma formation. Drain placement remains standard practice in many clinics, even though this may be redundant after flap fixation. METHODS: This is a prospective randomized controlled trial comparing mastectomy and wound closure using flap fixation with or without drain placement. The primary outcome measure was clinically significant seroma (CSS) incidence. The aim of this interim analysis was to assess the assumptions for the sample size calculation and to provide preliminary results. RESULTS: Between July 2020 and January 2023, 112 patients were included. CSS incidence was 9.1% in the drain group and 21% in the no-drain group. In total, 10 patients were lost to follow-up. These numbers are similar to the ones used for the sample size calculation. In the drain group, three patients required interventions for wound complications compared to nine in the no-drain group (odds ratio: 3.612 [95% confidence interval: 0.898-14.537]). CONCLUSION: The sample size calculation seems to be correct and no protocol amendments are necessary. Current preliminary results show no significant differences in CSS incidence. Complete results should be awaited to draw a well-powered conclusion regarding drain policy after mastectomy.

A single-center, randomized, non-inferiority study evaluating seroma formation after mastectomy combined with flap fixation with or without suction drainage: protocol for the Seroma reduction and drAin fRee mAstectomy (SARA) trial.

BACKGROUND: Seroma formation is a common complication after breast cancer surgery and can lead to delayed wound healing, infection, patient discomfort and repeated visits to the outpatient clinic. Mastectomy combined with flap fixation is becoming standard practice and is currently combined with closed-suction drainage. There is evidence showing that closed-suction drainage may be insufficient in preventing seroma formation. There is reasonable doubt whether there is still place for closed-suction drainage after mastectomy when flap fixation is performed. We hypothesize that mastectomy combined with flap fixation and closed suction drainage does not cause a significant lower incidence of seroma aspirations, when compared to mastectomy and flap fixation alone. Furthermore, we expect that patients without drainage will experience significantly less discomfort and comparable rates of surgical site infections. METHODS: This is a randomized controlled trial in female breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and flap fixation using sutures with or without sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Patients will be eligible for inclusion if they are older than 18 years, have an indication for mastectomy with or without sentinel procedure. Exclusion criteria are modified radical mastectomy, direct breast reconstruction, previous history of radiation therapy of the unilateral breast, breast conserving therapy and inability to give informed consent. A total of 250 patients will be randomly allocated to one of two groups: mastectomy combined with flap fixation and closed-suction drainage or mastectomy combined with flap fixation without drainage. Follow-up will be conducted up to six months postoperatively. The primary outcome is the proportion of patients undergoing one or more seroma aspirations. Secondary outcome measures consist of the number of invasive interventions, surgical site infection, quality of life measured using the SF-12 Health Survey, cosmesis, pain and number of additional outpatient department visits. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, no randomized controlled trial has been conducted comparing flap fixation with and without closed-suction drainage with seroma aspiration as the primary outcome. This study could result in finding evidence that supports performing mastectomy without closed-suction drainage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was approved by the medical ethical committee of Zuyderland Medical Center METC-Z on 20 March 2019 (METCZ20190023). The SARA Trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as per July 2019, Identifier: NCT04035590 .

Evaluating HEmopatch® in Reducing Seroma-Related Complications following Axillary Lymph Node DIssection: A Pilot Study (HEIDI).

Purpose: Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is performed to treat locoregional metastatic disease in breast cancer and melanoma patients. However, it is notorious for its complications, most commonly seroma formation and its sequelae. Ample research has been done to evaluate seroma formation after ALND; these results, however, have not been conclusive. Hence, this pilot study aimed to evaluate a readily available haemostatic patch, Hemopatch®, to assess its effect on seroma formation following ALND. Methods: In this pilot study, a prospective cohort of 20 patients receiving Hemopatch® following ALND was compared to a retrospective cohort of patients who underwent ALND between 2014 and 2019. The primary outcome measure was the number of patients developing clinically significant seroma (CSS) after ALND. Additionally, the number of wound complications, subsequent interventions, additional outpatient clinic visits, and drain output was assessed. Differences between groups were deemed clinically relevant if the proportions differed >50% between groups. Results: In total, 20 prospective and 42 retrospective patients were included. In the Hemopatch® group, 30% of the patients developed CSS, compared to 43% in the control group. Three patients in both groups developed a surgical site infection. Thirty-five percent of patients in the Hemopatch® group required additional unscheduled visits versus 62% of patients in the control group. Conclusion: The application of Hemopatch® after ALND did not lead to a clinically relevant reduction of CSS and wound complications. However, fewer Hemopatch® patients required additional outpatient clinic visits. Due to the limited amount of participants, the true value of Hemopatch® in ALND remains unclear.