Minimizing Nipple-Areolar Complex Complications in Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

PURPOSE: Nipple-areolar complex (NAC) viability remains a significant concern following prepectoral tissue expander (TE) reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). This study assesses the impact of intraoperative TE fill on NAC necrosis and identifies strategies for mitigating this risk. METHODS: A chart review of all consecutive, prepectoral TEs placed immediately after NSM was performed between March 2017 and December 2022 at a single center. Demographics, mastectomy weight, intraoperative TE fill, and complications were extracted for all patients. Partial NAC necrosis was defined as any thickness of skin loss including part of the NAC, whereas total NAC necrosis was defined as full-thickness skin loss involving the entirety of the NAC. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Forty-six patients (83 breasts) with an average follow-up of 22 months were included. Women were on average 46 years old, nonsmoker (98%), and nondiabetic (100%) and had a body mass index of 23 kg/m2. All reconstructions were performed immediately following prophylactic mastectomies in 49% and therapeutic mastectomies in 51% of cases. Three breasts (4%) were radiated, and 15 patients (33%) received chemotherapy. Mean mastectomy weight was 346 ± 274 g, median intraoperative TE fill was 150 ± 225 mL, and median final TE fill was 350 ± 170 mL. Partial NAC necrosis occurred in 7 breasts (8%), and there were zero instances of complete NAC necrosis. On univariate analysis, partial NAC necrosis was not associated with any patient demographic or operative characteristics, including intraoperative TE fill. In multivariable models controlling for age, body mass index, mastectomy weight, prior breast surgery, and intraoperative TE fill, partial NAC necrosis was associated with lower body mass index (odds ratio, 0.53; confidence interval [CI], 0.29-0.98; P < 0.05) and higher mastectomy weight (odds ratio, 1.1; CI, 1.01-1.20; P < 0.05). Prior breast surgery approached significance, as those breasts had a 19.4 times higher odds of partial NAC necrosis (95% CI, 0.88-427.6; P = 0.06). CONCLUSIONS: Nipple-areolar complex necrosis following prepectoral TE reconstruction is a rare but serious complication. In this study of 83 breasts, 7 (8%) developed partial NAC necrosis, and all but one were able to be salvaged.

Infra-areolar subcutaneous mastectomy in the surgical treatment of adolescent gynecomastia.

BACKGROUND: Despite being a common condition in puberty, only 5-10% of pubertal gynecomastia need surgical treatment. Here the authors present their experiences with infra-areolar subcutaneous mastectomy in the surgical treatment of adolescent gynecomastia. METHODS: The records of patients who underwent infra-areolar subcutaneous mastectomy for adolescent gynecomastia between January 2004 and December 2021 were reviewed retrospectively. The patients' demographic data, complaints and clinical presentation, physical examination, laboratory and radiological findings, surgical management, and postoperative follow-ups were evaluated. The patients were evaluated according to the localization of the gynecomastia (unilateral/bilateral) and according to the patients' body mass index (BMI) (normal/overweight). RESULTS: A total of 21 boys with a mean age of 15 ± 1.4 years were operated by the senior author and infra-areolar subcutaneous mastectomy by a semilunar incision was performed for adolescent gynecomastia. The mean duration of the complaint was 24.2 ± 10.9 months. Gynecomastia was bilateral in 15 (71.5%) and unilateral in 6 (28.5%) of the patients. Sixteen patients (76.2%) were normal weight, 5 (23.8%) were overweight. Chromosomal anomaly and hypogonadism were detected in two patients. Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia was detected in the pathology of one patient. The mean follow-up time was 2.7 ± 1 years, seroma developed in 2 patients at the early postoperative period. Their long-term follow-up was uneventful without complication. CONCLUSIONS: The results of infra-areolar subcutaneous mastectomy are very promising in pubertal gynecomastia due to good skin elasticity and without obesity in the adolescent age group. We believe that this method provides an almost invisible incision and a natural pectoral appearance for adolescent patients who have experienced serious emotional problems related to their body images.

Staged breast reconstruction utilizing primary nipple repositioning surgery prior to nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Staged nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) following mastopexy or breast reduction has become increasingly utilized in patients with large or ptotic breasts. The safety and efficacy of this approach has been demonstrated in recent years. However, the optimal timing between stages has not been established. The authors provide their experience with this staged approach with emphasis on timing between stages. An institutional review board approved this retrospective study. Data of all patients at a single institution who underwent staged NSM following mastopexy or reduction mammaplasty for therapeutic or prophylactic oncologic surgical management from 2016 to 2020 were reviewed. Timing between stages as well as surgical, oncologic, aesthetic, and patient-reported outcomes were evaluated. Nineteen patients (38 breasts) underwent staged NSM following planned mastopexy/breast reduction. The mean time interval between stages was 25 weeks. No patients developed nipple areolar complex necrosis. Infection and hematoma were seen in one breast (2.6%) and seroma in two (5.3%) after NSM. Delayed wound healing was seen in eight breasts (21.1%) after first stage mastopexy/reduction and in 12 breasts (31.6%) after NSM. Skin flap necrosis was noted in two breasts (5.3%) after NSM. No patients developed oncological recurrence. Mean patient-reported post-operative satisfaction and well-being scores were 63 and 67 out of 100, respectively. The authors describe their experience with staged NSM following nipple repositioning procedures. Their results suggest that this procedure can be performed safely with cosmetically favorable results if surgeons wait an average of 25 weeks between first and second stage procedures.

Expanded Indications for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Patients Older Than 60 Years.

INTRODUCTION: Although nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) have long been praised for excellent cosmetic results and the resultant psychosocial benefits, the feasibility and safety of these procedures in patients older than 60 years have yet to be demonstrated in a large population. METHODS: Patients undergoing NSM with or without IBR at the MedStar Georgetown University Hospital between 1998 and 2017 were included. Patient demographics, surgical intervention, and complication and recurrence events were retrieved from electronic medical records. Primary outcomes were recurrence and complication rates by age groups older and younger than 60 years. RESULTS: There were 673 breasts from 397 patients; 58 (8.6%) older than 60 years and 615 (91.4%) younger than 60 years with mean follow-up of 5.43 (0.12) years. The mean age for those older than 60 was 63.9 (3.3) years, whereas that for those younger than 60 was 43.1 (7.9) years (P < 0.001). The older than 60 group had significantly higher prevalence of diabetes, rates of therapeutic (vs prophylactic) and unilateral (vs bilateral) NSM, and mastectomy weight. However, there were no significant differences by age group in complication rates or increased risk of locoregional or distant recurrence with age. CONCLUSIONS: Based on similar complication profiles in both age groups, we demonstrate safety and feasibility of both NSM and IBR in the aging population. Despite increased age and comorbidity status, appropriately selected older women were able to achieve similar outcomes to younger women undergoing NSM with or without IBR.

Immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction in nipple-sparing mastectomy with Wise-pattern incision in large and ptotic breasts: Our experience and short-term results.

INTRODUCTION: Current breast cancer treatment trends advocate nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) as the preferred technique for selected patients. A considerable and ptotic breast is often considered a relative contraindication for NSM due to the increased risk of skin and nipple necrosis. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed for patients who underwent immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction (PPBR) after NSM with Wise-pattern incision between February 2020 and February 2023 at our institution. This procedure was offered to patients with grade II or III ptosis or large breasts eligible for NSM for therapeutic or prophylactic purpose. Exclusion criteria comprised a preoperative nipple-sternal notch distance greater than 30 cm, previous radiotherapy, pinch test <1 cm, body mass index (BMI) greater than 34 and active smoke. We present our short-term results with this technique. RESULTS: During the study period, 62 patients (76 breasts) had NSM with Wise-pattern incision. Patients had immediate PPBR with implant or tissue expander, both entirely wrapped with ADM. The median age of the patients was 57.0 years [The Interquartile Range (IQR 50.0-68.6)] with a median BMI of 25.5 (IQR 23.3-28.4). The median mastectomy specimen weight was 472 g (341-578). Median implant volume was 465 g (IQR 370-515). Major complications occurred in 8 patients (10.5%). Three patients experienced total nipple-areolar complex (NAC) necrosis (3.9%), and partial NAC necrosis occurred in 2 patients (2.6%). Two patients developed implant infection (2.6%). Univariate analysis showed a statistically significant correlation between major complications and the mastectomy specimen weight (p = 0.003). CONCLUSION: If oncologically indicated, NSM with Wise-pattern incision and immediate PPBR can safely be performed in selected patients with large and ptotic breasts.

Elongation of intercostal nerve cutaneous branches for breast and nipple neurotization during breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer: case-control study.

BACKGROUND: To restore sensation after breast reconstruction, a modified surgical approach was employed by identifying the cut fourth intercostal lateral cutaneous branch, elongating it with intercostal nerve grafts, and coapting it to the innervating nerve of the flap or by using direct neurotization of the spared nipple/skin. METHODS: This was a retrospective case-control study including 56 patients who underwent breast neurotization surgery. Breast operations included immediate reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (36 patients), skin-sparing mastectomy (8 patients), and delayed reconstruction with nipple preservation (7 patients) or without nipple preservation (5 patients). Patients who underwent breast reconstruction without neurotization were included as the non-neurotization negative control group. The contralateral normal breasts were included as positive controls. RESULTS: The mean(s.d.) monofilament test values were 0.07(0.10) g for the positive control breasts and 179.13(143.31) g for the breasts operated on in the non-neurotization group. Breasts that underwent neurotization had significantly better sensation after surgery, with a mean(s.d.) value of 35.61(92.63) g (P < 0.001). The mean(s.d.) sensory return after neurotization was gradual; 138.17(143.65) g in the first 6 months, 59.55(116.46) g at 7-12 months, 14.54(62.27) g at 13-18 months, and 0.37(0.50) g at 19-24 months after surgery. Two patients had accidental rupture of the pleura, which was repaired uneventfully. One patient underwent re-exploration due to a lack of improvement 1.5 years after neurotization. CONCLUSION: Using the lateral cutaneous branch of the intercostal nerve as the innervating stump and elongating it with intercostal nerve grafts is a suitable technique to restore sensation after mastectomy. This method effectively innervates reconstructed breasts and spares the nipple/skin with minimal morbidity.

Low Cancer Occurrence Rate following Prophylactic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has become widely available for breast cancer prophylaxis. There are limited data on its long-term oncologic safety. The objective of this study was to determine the incidence of breast cancer in patients who underwent prophylactic NSM. METHODS: All patients undergoing prophylactic NSM at a single institution from 2006 through 2019 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient demographic factors, genetic predispositions, mastectomy specimen pathology, and oncologic occurrences at follow-up were recorded. Descriptive statistics were performed where necessary to classify demographic factors and oncologic characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 871 prophylactic NSMs were performed on 641 patients, with median follow-up of 82.0 months (standard error 1.24). A total of 94.4% of patients ( n = 605) underwent bilateral NSMs, although only the prophylactic mastectomy was considered. The majority of mastectomy specimens (69.6%) had no identifiable pathology. A total of 38 specimens (4.4%) had cancer identified in mastectomy specimens, with ductal carcinoma in situ being the most common (92.1%; n = 35). Multifocal or multicentric disease was observed in seven cases (18.4%) and lymphovascular invasion was identified in two (5.3%). One patient (0.16%), who was a BRCA2 variant carrier, was found to have breast cancer 6.5 years after prophylactic mastectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Overall primary oncologic occurrence rates are very low in high-risk patients undergoing prophylactic NSM. In addition to reducing the risk of oncologic occurrence, prophylactic surgery itself may be therapeutic in a small proportion of patients. Continued surveillance for these patients remains important to assess at longer follow-up intervals. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Risk, IV.

Nipple necrosis rate with submuscular versus prepectoral implant-based reconstruction in nipple sparing mastectomy: Does it differ?

BACKGROUND: This study aims to compare the rate of nipple necrosis between the submuscular (SM) versus the prepectoral (PP) implant placement after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). METHODS: An institutional review board-approved database was reviewed of patients who underwent nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) with IBR at our institution between 2016 and 2019. Patients who had SM versus PP IBR were compared. Incidence of nipple necrosis was evaluated between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 525 NSM with IBR were performed in 320 patients with SM reconstruction in 61% (n â€‹= â€‹322) and PP in 39% (n â€‹= â€‹203) of the mastectomies. Overall, 43 nipples experienced some form of necrosis with 1% of mastectomies experiencing nipple loss. There was no difference between SM group and PP group at the rate of nipple necrosis (9 â€‹% vs 7 %, P â€‹= â€‹0.71). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing NSM with IBR, the rate of nipple necrosis, nipple loss or complications did not differ between groups whether the implant was placed SM or PP, supporting the safety of this newer procedure.

Minimally Invasive and Innovative Management of Prosthesis Infections in Endoscopic-Assisted Breast Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Implant infection continues to be the most common complication of breast reconstruction, and it can lead to serious consequences of implant loss. Recently, endoscopic-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction is being performed more frequently, with similar prosthetic infection incidence compared to conventional techniques. But there is little information published in the literature on the management of periprosthetic infection in endoscopic-assisted breast reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of patients who underwent endoscope-assisted breast reconstruction and developed periprosthetic infection between January 2020 and December 2022. Prosthesis infection was defined as any case where antibiotics were given, beyond the surgeon's standard perioperative period, in response to clinical signs such as swelling, pain, erythema, increased temperature, fever, etc. We summarized our clinical approach and treatment protocol for periprosthetic infection patients. Collected data include preoperative basic information, surgical details, postoperative data, and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 580 patients (713 reconstructions) underwent endoscopic-assisted immediate breast reconstruction. There were 58 patients developed periprosthetic infection, 14 of whom had bilateral prosthesis reconstruction with unilateral prosthesis infection. The incidence of infection was 10.0%. Average follow-up was 17.3 ± 8.9 months (range = 2-37 months). Of the 58 patients, 53 (91.4%) patients successful salvaged implant and 5(8.6%) patients removed prosthesis. During follow-up, Baker III capsular contracture occurred in 2 patients (3.8%) who had radiotherapy. CONCLUSION: Our management of prosthesis infections in endoscopic-assisted breast reconstruction is easy, minimally invasive, and inexpensive. This method can be repeated if the implant infection does not improve after the first drainage. What's more, our data suggest that our prosthesis salvage of periprosthetic infection is effective. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Addressing the Gray Zone in Affirmative Mastectomy: An Analysis of Fischer 2 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Surgical decision making in gender-affirming mastectomy (GAM) is based on a patient's classification using the Fischer scale. Fischer 1 patients are excellent candidates for periareolar (PA) approach and Fischer 3 patients almost exclusively undergo double incision with free nipple grafting (DIFNG). Fischer 2 patients are in a gray zone in which decision making is more challenging. In this patient population, periareolar approaches can lead to increased complication and revision rates but free grafting procedures seem excessive. We have created a treatment algorithm to address Fischer 2 patients and additionally developed a novel technique, the batwing, to provide patients with more options. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was undertaken to analyze the Fischer classification of all patients undergoing top surgery by a single surgeon at an academic institution from 2014 to 2021. The choice of surgical technique used as well as the outcomes of GAM among Fischer 2 patients was analyzed. RESULTS: Four hundred four patients underwent GAM, and 51 (11%) had Fischer 2 classification. The surgical techniques used were PA (27%), batwing (39%), nipple-sparing double incision (NSDI, 24%), and DIFNG (10%). Of those, 10% had major complications and 20% requested revision for contour irregularities. Major complication rates for PA, batwing, NSDI, and DIFNG were as follows: 2 of 14 patients (14%), 1 of 20 patients (5%), 1 of 12 patients (8%), and 1 of 5 patients (20%), respectively. The revision rate by technique was PA (36%), batwing (15%), NSDI (17%), and DIFNG (0%). CONCLUSIONS: For Fischer 2 patients, batwing and NSDI techniques avoid the need for free nipple graft while providing better exposure, improved control of nipple-areolar complex position, and decreased rate of revision as compared with the PA technique. The complication rate was not significantly different. We present an algorithm accounting for Fischer grade, unique patient characteristics, and patient desires.

Oncologic Outcomes in Nipple-sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction and Total Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction in Women with Breast Cancer: A Machine-Learning Analysis.

BACKGROUND: This study used a single-institution cohort, the Severance dataset, validated the results by using the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) database, adjusted with propensity-score matching (PSM), and analyzed by using a machine learning method. To determine whether the 5-year, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) of patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) are not inferior to those of women treated with total mastectomy/skin-sparing mastectomy (TM/SSM). METHODS: The Severance dataset enrolled 611 patients with early, invasive breast cancer from 2010 to 2017. The SEER dataset contained data for 485,245 patients undergoing TM and 14,770 patients undergoing NSM between 2000 and 2018. All patients underwent mastectomy and IBR. Intraoperative, frozen-section biopsy for the retro-areolar tissue was performed in the NSM group. The SEER dataset was extracted by using operation types, including TM/SSM and NSM. The primary outcome was DFS for the Severance dataset and OS for the SEER dataset. PSM analysis was applied. Survival outcomes were analyzed by using the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazard (Cox PH) regression model. We implemented XGBSE to predict mortality with high accuracy and evaluated model prediction performance using a concordance index. The final model inspected the impact of relevant predictors on the model output using shapley additive explanation (SHAP) values. RESULTS: In the Severance dataset, 151 patients underwent NSM with IBR and 460 patients underwent TM/SSM with IBR. No significant differences were found between the groups. In multivariate analysis, NSM was not associated with reduced oncologic outcomes. The same results were observed in PSM analysis. In the SEER dataset, according to the SHAP values, the individual feature contribution suggested that AJCC stage ranks first. Analyses from the two datasets confirmed no impact on survival outcomes from the two surgical methods. CONCLUSIONS: NSM with IBR is a safe and feasible procedure in terms of oncologic outcomes. Analysis using machine learning methods can be successfully applied to identify significant risk factors for oncologic outcomes.

Oncological status is not a determinant of refraining from breast reconstruction among 490 candidates for mastectomy and post-mastectomy radiotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Although breast reconstruction in the setting of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) is controversial, we offer nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based breast reconstruction ([N]SSM/IIBR) to women needing primary mastectomy regardless of PMRT. Nevertheless, some of these women have no reconstruction. PURPOSE: To assess the uptake of breast reconstruction in women who undergo PMRT and the patient characteristics associated with such uptake. Additionally, we assessed the determinants of forgoing breast reconstruction. METHODOLOGY: Demographic, physical and oncological characteristics of women who underwent mastectomy, PMRT and breast reconstruction were compared to the characteristics of those who did not undergo breast reconstruction from 2013 through 2018. As determinants of delaying or refraining from breast reconstruction, we distinguished between an oncological reason, patient's preference, patient's co-morbidity, combined tobacco abuse and obesity and the need for PMRT. RESULTS: 490 women received PMRT. Of these, 396 women (81%) underwent combined [N]SSM/IIBR and PMRT or mastectomy and PMRT with delayed breast reconstruction. Ninety-four additional women (19%) did not undergo breast reconstruction. The latter group differed significantly from those who did in demographic and physical characteristics but not in terms of oncological diagnosis and history. Patient's preference was the single most frequent determinant of not performing either immediate or delayed breast reconstruction among these 94 women. Oncological status was not a major determinant in refraining from reconstruction. CONCLUSION: The significant difference in non-oncological characteristics between the reconstructed and non-reconstructed women confirms the importance of these characteristics in the preference for either reconstruction or non-reconstruction.