RÉSUMÉ
Purpose: Patients undergoing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for breast cancer face a high risk of lymphedema, further increased by high body mass index (BMI) and insulin resistance. GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have the potential to reduce these risk factors, but their role in lymphedema has never been investigated. The purpose of this study was to determine if GLP-RAs can reduce the risk of lymphedema in patients undergoing ALND. Methods: All patients who underwent ALND at a tertiary cancer center between 2010 and 2023 were reviewed. Patients with less than 2 years of follow-up from the time of ALND were excluded. Race, BMI, radiation, chemotherapy history, pre-existing diagnosis of diabetes, lymphedema development after ALND, and the use of GLP-1RAs were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression analysis was performed to assess if there was a significant reduction in the risk of developing lymphedema after ALND. A sub-group analysis of non-diabetic patients was also performed. Results: 3,830 patients who underwent ALND were included, 76 of which were treated with. GLP-1 RAs. The incidence of lymphedema in the GLP-1 RA cohort was 6.6% (5 patients). Compared to 28.5% (1,071 patients) in the non-GLP-1 RA cohort. On multivariate regression analysis, patients who were treated with GLP-1 RA were 86% less likely to develop lymphedema compared to the non-GLP-1 RA cohort (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04-0.32, p < 0.0001). A BMI of 25 kg/m 2 or greater was a statistically significant risk factor for developing lymphedema with an odds ratio of 1.34 (95% CI 1.16-1.56, p < 0.0001). Diabetes was associated with lymphedema development that closely approached statistical significance (OR 1.32, 95% CI 0.97-1.78, p = 0.06). A subgroup analysis solely on non-diabetic patients showed similar results. The odds of developing lymphedema were 84% lower for patients without diabetes treated with GLP1-RAs compared to those who did not receive GLP-1 RAs (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.05-0.40, p < 0.0001). Conclusion: GLP1-RAs appear to significantly reduce the risk of lymphedema in patientsundergoing ALND. The mechanism of action may be multifactorial and not limited to weight reduction and insulin resistance. Future prospective analysis is warranted to clarify the role of GLP-1RAs in reducing lymphedema risk.
RÉSUMÉ
BACKGROUND: Prepectoral implant placement for postmastectomy breast reconstruction has increased in recent years. Benefits of prepectoral reconstruction may include lack of animation deformities and reduced postoperative pain, but its complication profile is currently unclear. This study aimed to examine the complication profile of prepectoral tissue expanders (TEs) to determine factors associated with TE loss. METHODS: A retrospective review was performed to identify all patients who underwent immediate prepectoral TE reconstruction from January 2018 to June 2021. The decision to use the prepectoral technique was based on mastectomy skin quality and patient comorbidities. Patient demographics, comorbidities, and operative details were evaluated. Outcomes of interest included TE loss, seroma, hematoma, infection/cellulitis, mastectomy skin flap necrosis requiring revision, and TE exposure. Logistic regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with TE loss. RESULTS: The study identified 1225 TEs. The most frequent complications were seroma (8.7%, n = 106), infection/cellulitis (8.2%, n = 101), and TE loss (4.2%, n = 51). Factors associated with TE loss in the univariate analysis included ethnicity, history of smoking, body mass index, mastectomy weight, and neoadjuvant chemotherapy. In the multivariate regression analysis, only mastectomy weight had a positive association with TE loss (odds ratio, 1.001; p = 0.016). CONCLUSION: Prepectoral two-stage breast reconstruction can be performed safely with an acceptable early complication profile. The study data suggest that increasing mastectomy weight is the most significant factor associated with TE loss. Further research examining the quality of the soft tissue envelope and assessing patient-reported outcomes would prove beneficial.