Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Pre-Pectoral or Sub-Pectoral Implant: Assessing Clinical Practice, Post-Surgical Outcomes, Patient's Satisfaction and Cost.

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) rates increase during last years and implant-based reconstruction was the most commonly performed procedure. We examined data collected over 25 months to assess complication rate, duration of surgery, patient's satisfaction and cost, according to pre-pectoral or sub-pectoral implant-IBR. All patients who received an implant-IBR, from January 2020 to January 2022, were included. Results were compared between pre-pectoral and sub-pectoral implant-IBR in univariate and multivariate analysis. We performed 316 implant-IBR, 218 sub-pectoral and 98 (31%) pre-pectoral. Pre-pectoral implant-IBR was significantly associated with the year (2021: OR=12.08 and 2022: OR=76.6), the surgeons and type of mastectomy (SSM vs NSM: OR=0.377). Complications and complications Grade 2-3 rates were 12.9% and 10.1% for sub-pectoral implant-IBR respectively, without significant difference with pre-pectoral implant-IBR: 17.3% and 13.2%. Complications Grade 2-3 were significantly associated with age <50-years (OR=2.27), ASA-2 status (OR=3.63) and cup-size >C (OR=3.08), without difference between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Durations of surgery were significantly associated with cup-size C and >C (OR=1.72 and 2.80), with sentinel lymph-node biopsy and axillary dissection (OR=3.66 and 9.59) and with sub-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=2.088). Median hospitalization stay was 1 day, without difference between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Cost of surgery was significantly associated with cup-size > C (OR=2.216) and pre-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=8.02). Bad-medium satisfaction and IBR-failure were significantly associated with local recurrence (OR=8.820), post-mastectomy radiotherapy (OR=1.904) and sub-pectoral implant-IBR (OR=2.098). Conclusion: Complications were not different between pre and sub-pectoral implant-IBR. Pre-pectoral implant-IBR seems a reliable and faster technique with better patient satisfaction but with higher cost.

Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: Results of a mono-centric 4-years cohort.

INTRODUCTION: Oncological safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes seems to be similar between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). We report our experience of IBR for consecutive mastectomies realized in a recent period of four years in order to determined immediate surgical results according to type of mastectomy and type of reconstruction, as mains objectives. METHODS: All mastectomies with IBR during years 2016-2019 were included. A retrospective analysis with prospective data collection was performed. RESULTS: We analyzed 748 IBR: 353 nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM), 391 skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM) and 4 standard mastectomies, 551 with definitive implant or expanders and 196 with latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). More NSM were performed during the 2 last years and more LDF were performed for high BMI, high breast cup-size, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy and local recurrence. We realized 111 robotic NSM and 125 robotic LDF. Longer duration of surgery was significantly associated with the robotic procedures.The overall complications crude rate was 31.4% with 9.9% of re-operations and 5.8% of implant loss. Grade 2-3 complications were significantly associated with smoking. Breast complications occurred in 32.9% of mastectomies with principally skin or nipple-areola-complex suffering or necrosis, hematomas and infections. A predictive score was determined to evaluate risk of complications before surgery. CONCLUSION: Mastectomy with IBR seems to be a safe technique with an acceptable complication rate which is increased by tobacco use, high breast cup-size and IBR-type.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy validation for large tumors.

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) remains under discussion for large size tumors. The aim of this work has been to study the false negative rate (FNR) of SLNB for large tumors and predictive factors of false negative (FN). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A study of a multicentric cohort, involved patients presenting N0 breast cancer with a SLNB eventually completed by complementary axillary lymph node dissection (cALND). The main criteria were the FNR and the predictive factors of FN. RESULTS: 12.415 patients were included: 748 with tumors ≥30 mm, 1101 with tumors >20 and < 30 mm and 10.566 with tumors ≤20 mm, with a cALND respectively for 501 patients (67%), 523 (62.1%) and 2775 (26.3%). The FNR were respectively: 3.05% (IC95%: 1.3-4.8) for tumors ≥30 mm*, 3.5% (1.8-5.2) for tumors >20 and < 30 mm*, 1.8% (1-2.4) for tumors ≤20 mm (p < 0.05) (*Not significant). At multivariate analysis, SN number harvested ≤2 (OR:2.0, p = 0.023) and tumor size >20 and < 30 mm (OR:2.07, p = 0.017) were significant predictive factors of FN, without significant value for tumor size ≥30 mm (OR:1.83, p = 0.073). CONCLUSION: The FNR of SLNB was not higher amongst large size tumors compared to tumors of a smaller size. These results support the validation of SNLB for tumors up to 50 mm.