Bovine Acellular Dermal Matrix-Based Breast Reconstruction in Previously Irradiated Breasts: Complications and Outcomes From a Single-Center Experience.

ABSTRACT: Radiation therapy is considered today an integral part of the management of breast cancer. However, radiotherapy significantly increases the incidence of total complications in breast reconstruction. Several procedures have been adopted to reduce complication rates in irradiated fields, including the use of acellular dermal matrices (ADMs). We conducted a retrospective analysis of our single-center experience with ADM-assisted implant-based reconstruction or revision surgeries for capsular contracture treatment in irradiated breasts. We divided our population into 4 groups based on prior surgical history: group A (previous quadrantectomy), group B (previous mastectomy and expander reconstruction), group C (previous mastectomy and implant reconstruction), and group D (prior quadrantectomy followed by mastectomy and implant reconstruction). At the European Oncology Institute in Milan, Italy, between June 2017 and April 2019, we identified 84 patients for a total of 86 irradiated breasts reconstructed with implant and ADM. We observed a total of 12 reconstructive failure, with the highest rate of failure in group B (16.6%) and in group D (15.38%). Overall, we recorded 22 total complications (24.4%): 12 major complications and 10 minor complications. The most common complication was infection, with 9 cases (10.4%), 6 of which were classified as severe and required implant removal. In group B, we observed the highest complication rate, both major and minor, with 7 of 42 patients (16.6%) experiencing each. Before reconstruction with ADM, the Baker grade ranged from 3 to 4, with a mean of 3.25. At the 2-year follow-up, the Baker grade ranged from 1 to 4, with a mean of 1.9. Surgeons were highly satisfied with the aesthetic result in 72.1% of cases, moderately in 8.1% and unsatisfied in 5.81%, and in 13.9%, the outcome was not assessable because of reconstructive failure. The worst aesthetic result was in group B. We observed significant reduction in capsular contracture in revision surgeries despite a moderately high rate of complications in previous quadrantectomy and radiotherapy. In our experience, breast reconstruction with implant and ADM is not the primary surgical indication in case of prior irradiation, but it can be considered as a valid alternative with reasonable safety profile, to be used in selected cases.

The Effect of Adjuvant Radiotherapy on One- and Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction and on Autologous Reconstruction: A Multicenter Italian Study among 18 Senonetwork Breast Centres.

Purpose: In modern breast cancer treatment, a growing role has been observed for breast reconstruction together with an increase in clinical indications for postmastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT). Choosing the optimum type of reconstructive technique is a clinical challenge. We therefore conducted a national multicenter study to analyze the impact of PMRT on breast reconstruction. Methods: We conducted a retrospective case-control multicenter study on women undergoing breast reconstruction. Data were collected from 18 Italian Breast Centres and stored in a cumulative database which included the following: autologous reconstruction, direct-to-implant (DTI), and tissue expander/immediate (TE/I). For all patients, we described complications and surgical endpoints to complications such as reconstruction failure, explant, change in type of reconstruction, and reintervention. Results: From 2001 to April 2020, 3116 patients were evaluated. The risk for any complication was significantly increased in patients receiving PMRT (aOR, 1.73; 95% CI, 1.33-2.24; p < 0.001). PMRT was associated with a significant increase in the risk of capsular contracture in the DTI and TE/I groups (aOR, 2.24; 95% CI, 1.57-3.20; p < 0.001). Comparing type of procedures, the risk of failure (aOR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.06-3.12, p=0.030), explant (aOR, 3.34; 95% CI, 3.85-7.83, p < 0.001), and severe complications (aOR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.88-3.43, p < 0.001) were significantly higher in the group undergoing DTI reconstruction as compared to TE/I reconstruction. Conclusion: Our study confirms that autologous reconstruction is the procedure least impacted by PMRT, while DTI appears to be the most impacted by PMRT, when compared with TE/I which shows a lower rate of explant and reconstruction failure. The trial is registered with NCT04783818, and the date of registration is 1 March, 2021, retrospectively registered.

Prospective study: Impact of breast magnetic resonance imaging on oncoplastic surgery and on indications of mastectomy in patients who were previously candidates to breast conserving surgery.

Background: Routine use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in the staging of patients with early breast cancer is still controversial. Oncoplastic surgery (OP) allows for wider resections without compromising the aesthetic results. This study aimed to assess the impact of preoperative MRI on surgical planning and on indications of mastectomy. Methods: Prospective study including T1-T2 breast cancer patients treated between January 2019 and December 2020 in the Breast Unit of the Hospital Nossa Senhora das Graças in Curitiba, Brazil. All patients had indication for breast conserving surgery (BCS) with OP and did a breast MRI after conventional imaging. Results: 131 patients were selected. Indication for BCS was based on clinical examination and conventional imaging (mammography and ultrasound) findings. After undergoing breast MRI, 110 patients (84.0%) underwent BCS with OP and 21 (16.0%) had their surgical procedure changed to mastectomy. Breast MRI revealed additional findings in 52 of 131 patients (38%). Of these additional findings, 47 (90.4%) were confirmed as invasive carcinoma. Of the 21 patients who underwent mastectomies, the mean tumor size was 2.9 cm (± 1,7cm), with all having additional findings on breast MRI (100% of the mastectomies group vs 28.2% of the OP, p<0.01). Of the 110 patients submitted to OP, the mean tumor size was 1,6cm (± 0,8cm), with only 6 (5.4%) presenting positive margins at the final pathology assessment. Conclusion: Preoperative breast MRI has an impact on the OP scenario, bringing additional information that may help surgical planning. It allowed selecting the group with additional tumor foci or greater extension to convert to mastectomy, with a consequent low reoperation rate of 5.4% in the BCS group. This is the first study to assess the impact of breast MRI in the preoperative planning of patients undergoing OP for the treatment of breast cancer.

Safety of autologous fat grafting in breast cancer: a multicenter Italian study among 17 senonetwork breast units autologous fat grafting safety: a multicenter Italian retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: Autologous fat grafting (AFG), defined as the re-implant to the breast of fat tissue from different body areas, has been firstly applied to esthetic plastic surgery and then has moved to reconstructive surgery, mainly used for scar correction and opposite breast altering. Nevertheless, due to the potentially unsafe stem-like properties of adipocytes at the tumoral bed level, no clear evidence of the procedure's oncological safety has been clearly documented at present. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively collected data of early breast cancer (BC) patients from 17 Italian Breast Units and assessed differences in terms of locoregional recurrence rate (LRR) and locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) between patients who underwent AFG and patients who did not. Differences were analyzed in the entire cohort of invasive tumors and in different subgroups, according to prognostic biological subtypes. RESULTS: With a median follow-up time of 60 months, LRR was 5.3% (n = 71) in the matched population, 3.9% (n = 18) in the AFG group, and 6.1% (n = 53) in the non-AFG group, suggesting non-inferiority of AFG (p = 0.084). Building Kaplan-Meier curves confirmed non-inferiority of the AFG procedure for LRFS (aHR 0.73, 95% CI 0.41-1.30, p = 0.291). The same effect, in terms of LRFS, was also documented among different biological subtypes (luminal-like group, aHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.34-1.68, p = 0.493; HER2 enriched-like, aHR 0.89, 95% CI 0.19-4.22, p = 0.882; and TNBC, aHR 0.61, 95% CI 0.12-2.98, p = 0.543). CONCLUSIONS: Our study confirms in a very large, multicenter cohort of early BC patients that, aside the well-known benefits on the esthetic result, AFG do not interfere negatively with cancer prognosis.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Synchronous Multicentric and Multifocal Tumors: Is It Oncologically Safe? A Retrospective Matched-Cohort Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic surgery is a well-established approach that combines breast-conserving treatment for breast cancer and plastic surgery techniques. Although this approach already has been described for multicentric and multifocal tumors, no long-term oncologic follow-up evaluation and no comparison with patients undergoing mastectomy have been published. This study aimed to evaluate whether oncoplastic surgery is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive primary multicentric and multifocal breast cancer. METHODS: The study compared a consecutive series of 100 patients with multicentric or multifocal tumors who had undergone oncoplastic surgery (study group) with 100 patients who had multicentric or multifocal tumors and had undergone mastectomy (control group) during a prolonged period. The end points evaluated were disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), cumulative incidence of local recurrence (CI-L), regional recurrence (CI-R), and distant recurrence (CI-D), all measured from the date of surgery. RESULTS: The OS and DFS were similar between the two groups. The incidence of local events was higher in the oncoplastic group, whereas the incidence of regional events was slightly higher in the mastectomy group. These differences were not statistically significant. The cumulative incidence of distant events was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: To the authors' knowledge, the current study provides the best available evidence suggesting that the oncoplastic approach is a safe and reliable treatment for managing invasive multifocal and multicentric breast cancers.

A Randomized Trial of Robotic Mastectomy Versus Open Surgery in Women With Breast Cancer or BrCA Mutation.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare robotic mastectomy with open classical technique outcomes in breast cancer patients. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: As the use of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy continues to rise, improved understanding of the surgical, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes is imperative for appropriate patient selection as well as to better understand indications, limits, advantages, and dangers. METHODS: In a phase III, open label, single-center, randomized controlled trial involving 80 women with breast cancer (69) or with BRCA mutation (11), we compared the outcome of robotic and open nipple sparing mastectomy. Primary outcomes were surgical complications and quality of life using specific validated questionnaires. Secondary objective included oncologic outcomes. RESULTS: Robotic procedure was 1 hour and 18 minutes longer than open (P < 0.001). No differences in the number or type of complications (P = 0.11) were observed. Breast-Q scores in satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being were significantly higher after robotic mastectomy versus open procedure. Respect to baseline, physical and sexual well-being domains remained stable after robotic mastectomy, whereas they significantly decreased after open procedure (P < 0.02). The overall Body Image Scale questionnaire score was 20.7 ±â€Š13.8 versus 9.9 ±â€Š5.1 in the robotic versus open groups respectively, P < 0.0001. At median follow-up 28.6months (range 3.7-43.3), no local events were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Complications were similar among groups upholding the robotic technique to be safe. Quality of life was maintained after robotic mastectomy while significantly decrease after open surgery. Early follow-up confirm no premature local failure.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03440398.

Breast Reconstruction after Surgical Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ.

The role of plastic surgeon in breast reconstruction is mandatory in those cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) requiring a wide surgical excision. The reconstructive treatment must be tailored on each patient with the aim to obtain a good cosmetic result in terms of form and symmetry, avoiding surgical complications.

Implant risk failure in patients undergoing postmastectomy 3-week hypofractionated radiotherapy after immediate reconstruction.

AIM: To evaluate reconstruction failure (RF) rate in patients receiving implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and hypofractionated (HF) postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Stage II-III breast cancer patients, treated with HF-PMRT using intensity modulated radiotherapy were stratified in two groups according to IBR: single-stage direct-to-implant (DTI-group) and two-stage expander and implant (TE/I-group). Irradiated patients were matched with non-irradiated ones who underwent the same IBR during the same period. Prescription dose was 40.05 Gy/15 fractions to chest wall and infra/supraclavicular nodal region. Primary endpoint was RF defined as the need of major revisional surgery (MaRS) for implant removal or conversion to autologous reconstruction. Secondary endpoint was the rate of minor revisional surgeries (MiRS) including implant repositioning or substitution with another implant. RESULTS: One hundred and seven irradiated patients (62 in TE/I-group, 45 in DTI-group) were matched with 107 non-irradiated subjects. Median follow-up was 4.2 years (0.1-6.1) In the TE/I setting, MaRS was performed in 8/62 irradiated patients (12.9%) of the irradiated TE/I group compared to 1/62 (1.6%) non-irradiated subjects (p = 0.015). In the DTI setting, MaRs occurred in 3/45 irradiated patients (6.7%) compared to 1/45 non-irradiated ones (2.2%) (p = 0.35). Overall MaRS rate was 10.3% in the irradiated group. MiRS was performed in 35.6% and 31.1% of the irradiated and non-irradiated DTI-groups (p = 0.65), respectively, and in 12.9% and 8.1% of the irradiated and non-irradiated TE/I groups (p = 0.38), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the non-irradiated counterparts, the TE/I group showed higher rate of RF, while no statistically significant difference was observed for the DTI group. The use of hypofractionation and IMRT to implant-based IBR did not seem to increase the risk of RF which appeared to be in line with the literature.

Long-Term Results and Reconstruction Failure in Patients Receiving Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy with a Temporary Expander or Permanent Implant in Place.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated the risk of reconstruction failure after mastectomy, immediate breast reconstruction, and radiotherapy to either a temporary tissue expander or permanent implant. METHODS: Records of women treated at a single institution between June of 1997 and December of 2011 were reviewed. Two patient groups were identified based on type of immediate breast reconstruction: tissue expander followed by exchange with a permanent implant and permanent implant. The study endpoint was rate of reconstruction failure, defined as a replacement, loss of the implant, or conversion to flap. RESULTS: The tissue expander/permanent implant and the permanent implant groups consisted of 63 and 75 patients, respectively. The groups were well balanced for clinical and treatment characteristics. With a median follow-up of 116 months, eight implant losses, 50 implant replacements, and four flap conversions were recorded. Reconstruction failure occurred in 22 of 63 patients in the expander/implant group and in 40 of 75 patients in the permanent implant group. A traditional proportional hazards model showed a higher risk of reconstruction failure for the expander/implant group (hazard ratio, 2.01) and a significantly shorter time to reconstruction failure compared with the permanent implant group (109.2 months versus 157.7 months; p = 0.03); however, according to a competing risk model, the between-groups cumulative incidences were not significantly different (hazard ratio, 1.09). CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy to either a tissue expander or a permanent implant presented a fairly large risk of reconstruction failure over time. The expander/implant group was not more likely to develop reconstruction failure compared to permanent implant group, but the timing of onset was shorter. More complex techniques should be investigated to lower the risk of reconstruction failure. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Update on the Feasibility and Progress on Robotic Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) may allow for more precise anatomic dissection and improved cosmetic outcomes over conventional open nipple-sparing mastectomy; however, data regarding the feasibility and safety of the procedure are limited. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present and discuss perioperative surgical outcomes and early oncologic follow-up data on consecutive patients undergoing RNSM from June 2014 to January 2019. METHODS: Patients underwent RNSM and immediate robotic breast reconstruction through an axillary incision at a single institution. Perioperative data, complications at 3 months postoperatively, pathological data, and adjuvant therapies were recorded. Local recurrence-free, disease-free, and overall survival were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 73 women underwent 94 RNSM procedures. Indications were invasive breast cancer in 39 patients, ductal carcinoma in situ in 17 patients, and BRCA mutation in 17 patients. Mean surgery time was 3 h and 32 min. One-step reconstruction with implant occurred in 89.4% of procedures. The rate of complications requiring reoperation was 4.3%, and the rate of flap or nipple necrosis was 1.1%. Median follow-up was 19 months (range 3.1-44.8). No local recurrences occurred. Overall survival at 12, 24, or 60 months was 98% (95% confidence interval 86-100%). CONCLUSION: We observed a low complication rate in 94 consecutive RNSM procedures, demonstrating the procedure is technically feasible and safe. We found no early local failures at 19 months follow-up. Long-term follow-up is needed to confirm oncologic safety. Future clinical trials to study the advantages and disadvantages of RNSM are warranted.

HALFMOON TomoTherapy (Helical ALtered Fractionation for iMplant partial OmissiON): implant-sparing post-mastectomy radiotherapy reshaping the clinical target volume in the reconstructed breast.

PURPOSE: To report the dosimetric feasibility of the radiation technique HALFMOON (Helical ALtered Fractionation for iMplant partial OmissiON) for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) in intermediate-high-risk breast cancer patients with implant-based immediate breast reconstruction, where the clinical target volume (CTV) does not include the whole implant (implant-sparing approach). METHODS: In the HALFMOON technique, the CTV consisted of skin, subcutaneous tissues, and pectoralis major muscle, excluding the implant, chest wall muscles, and rib plane. The HALFMOON plans were compared with conventionally contoured CTV plans, in which the whole implant, chest wall muscles, and ribs plane were included in the CTV, in a ratio 1:3. All patients underwent hypofractionated treatment of 40.05 Gy/15 fractions, using helical Tomotherapy®. RESULTS: Eighteen patients undergoing HALFMOON technique were compared to 54 subjects treated with conventionally contoured CTV plans. No difference was found in the planning target volume coverage between the two groups. Conversely, a statistically relevant dose reduction in HALFMOON patients was observed for ipsilateral lung (D15%, p < 0.0001; D20%, p < 0.0001; D35%, p = 0.003), contralateral lung (D20%, p = 0.048), contralateral breast (D15%, p = 0.031; D20%, p = 0.047), and stomach (Dmean, p = 0.011). Regarding the implant, V90% and D50% decreased by 46% and 8%, respectively, in the HALFMOON plans (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The HALFMOON approach is technically feasible and resulted in high-dose conformity of the target with a significant reduction of radiation dose delivered to implant and other organs. A clinical study is needed to assess the impact on reconstruction cosmetic outcome and local control.

Oncological Outcomes of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Single-Center Experience of 1989 Patients.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly used in women with breast cancer who are not eligible for conservative surgery, but extensive outcome data are lacking and indications have not been established. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the oncological outcomes of NSM in a large series of patients with invasive or in situ breast cancer treated at a single center. METHODS: We analyzed 1989 consecutive women who had an NSM in 2003-2011, for invasive (1711 patients) or in situ cancer (278 patients) at the European Institute of Oncology, Italy, and followed-up to December 2016. Endpoints were local recurrences, recurrences in the nipple-areola complex (NAC), NAC necrosis, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 94 months (interquartile range 70-117), 91/1711 (5.3%) patients with invasive cancer had local recurrence (4.8% invasive disease, 0.5% in situ disease), and 11/278 (4.0%) patients with in situ disease had local recurrence (1.8% invasive disease, 2.2% in situ disease). Thirty-six (1.8%) patients had NAC recurrence, 9 with in situ disease (4 invasive and 5 in situ recurrences), and 27 with invasive disease (18 invasive and 9 in situ recurrences). NAC loss for necrosis occurred in 66 (3.3%) patients. There were 131 (6.6%) deaths, 109 (5.5%) as a result of breast cancer. OS at 5 years was 96.1% in women with invasive cancer and 99.2% in women with in situ disease. CONCLUSIONS: The findings in this large series, with a median follow-up of nearly 8 years, indicate that NSM is oncologically safe for selected patients. The rate of NAC loss was acceptably low.

Oncoplastic breast surgery for the management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): is it oncologically safe? A retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Few data exist in literature regarding oncoplastic surgery (ONC) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The role of ONC in the treatment of DCIS has not been elucidated yet: no case-control study has yet been published on the issue and no long-term oncologic results are reported. METHODS: Using the European Institute of Oncology (IEO) institutional breast cancer data base we investigated the oncologic safety of ONC for DCIS comparing a consecutive series of 44 patients who have underwent ONC followed by external irradiation for DCIS (Group A-study group) with 375 patients who received conservation alone followed by external irradiation for DCIS (Group B control group) in the same period. We excluded patients presenting with secondary tumors or local relapses and those requiring re-excision or completion mastectomy for positive margins. Primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS) and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) within the study group and comparison with the control group. RESULTS: Events rates and death rates were similar in the two groups. The average annual rate of invasive IBTR in group A and B was 1.6% and 1.0% respectively. No difference in the rate of lymphnode metastasis, distant metastasis, contralateral breast cancer, other primary cancer or death was observed across the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest the safety of ONC and irradiation for the management of DCIS extending the indications for conservation in DCIS patients otherwise treated with mastectomy. It provides the best available evidence supporting ONC as a valid treatment option for the management of DCIS.

Fat Grafting after Invasive Breast Cancer: A Matched Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Fat grafting has been widely indicated for postmastectomy and postlumpectomy breast reconstruction. The literature emphasizes the clinical efficacy of fat grafting, but experimental studies raise important questions about the recurrence risk because of the stimulation of remaining cancer cells by progenitor or adult adipocytes. Because breast conservative treatment provides a higher risk of residual cancer cells in the breast tissue compared with mastectomy, the authors set up a matched case-control study of fat grafting versus no fat grafting after breast conservative treatment. METHODS: The authors collected data from 322 consecutive patients operated on for a primary invasive breast cancer who subsequently underwent fat grafting for breast reshaping from 2006 to 2013. All patients were free of recurrence before fat grafting. For each patient, the authors selected one patient with similar characteristics who did not undergo fat grafting. RESULTS: After a mean follow-up of 4.6 years (range, 0.1 to 10.2 years) after fat grafting, or a corresponding time for controls, the authors observed no difference in the incidence of local events (fat grafting, n = 14; controls, n = 16; p = 0.49), axillary nodes metastasis (fat grafting, n = 3; controls, n = 6; p = 0.23), distant metastases (fat grafting, n = 14; controls, n = 15; p = 0.67), or contralateral breast cancer (fat grafting, n = 4; controls, n = 4; p = 0.51). CONCLUSION: Fat grafting seems to be a safe procedure after breast conservative treatment for breast cancer patients. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

Total Breast Reconstruction With Fat Grafting After Internal Expansion and Expander Removal.

INTRODUCTION: The development of fat grafting techniques both in cosmetic and reconstructive breast surgery has highlighted the need to recreate a breast mound using similar tissues and without visible scarring. Our technique combines skin expansion by conventional expanders and breast volume replacement by serial fat grafting and final expander removal. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fat grafting had been performed both by Coleman technique and Bodyjet system. We report a series of 12 cases enrolled between 2008 and 2013. Each case has been presented in this article, focusing on received treatment, observed complications, and results. RESULTS: Satisfactory results were observed 6 months after the last session in most of the concluded reconstructions with a low complication rate.

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer: Feasibility and safety study.

BACKGROUND: We previously devised and reported on an innovative surgical technique of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate robotic breast reconstruction. Here we describe the outcome of the first 29 such consecutive procedures performed on breast cancer patients to assess feasibility, reproducibility and safety. METHODS: The following morbidity factors were tested: operation time, conversion rate to open technique, length of hospitalization, registration of complications for 1 year postoperatively and their characterization as either minor, major, or multiple, depending on clinical severity and treatment required. RESULTS: The total duration of the final robotic surgeries of our series was around 3 h, showing a very rapid learning curve. The conversion rate due to technical problems was 2 of the 29 procedures (6,9%). No major complications, including hematoma, seroma, skin or nipple-areola injury or necrosis or infection were observed for any case. Two patients had a small degree of blistering from internal electrocautery in the breast skin flap, both of which resolved in one week without any specific therapy. No systemic complications were observed. CONCLUSION: The low conversion rate to open surgery, the rapid learning curve and the low rate of post-operative complications observed in this preliminary series lead us to endorse a prospective study aimed at evaluating patient satisfaction.