Optimizing Acellular Dermal Matrix Integration in Heterologous Breast Reconstructive Surgery: Surgical Tips and Post-Operative Management.

Background and Objective: Prepectoral implant placement in breast reconstruction is currently a must-have in the portfolios of breast surgeons. The introduction of new tools and conservative mastectomies is a game changer in this field. The prepectoral plane usually goes hand-in-hand with the ADM wrapping of the implant. It is a cell-free dermal matrix comprising a structurally integrated basement membrane complex and an extracellular matrix. The literature reports that ADMs may be useful, but proper patient selection, surgical placement, and post-operative management are essential to unlock the potential of this tool, as these factors contribute to the proper integration of the matrix with surrounding tissues. Materials and Methods: A total of 245 prepectoral breast reconstructions with prostheses or expanders and ADMs were performed in our institution between 2016 and 2022. A retrospective study was carried out to record patient characteristics, risk factors, surgical procedures, reconstructive processes, and complications. Based on our experience, we developed a meticulous reconstruction protocol in order to optimize surgical practice and lower complication rates. The DTI and two-stage reconstruction were compared. Results: Seroma formation was the most frequent early complication (less than 90 days after surgery) that we observed; however, the majority were drained in outpatient settings and healed rapidly. Secondary healing of wounds, which required a few more weeks of dressing, represented the second most frequent early complication (10.61%). Rippling was the most common late complication, particularly in DTI patients. After comparing the DTI and two-stage reconstruction, no statistically significant increase in complications was found. Conclusions: The weakness of prepectoral breast reconstruction is poor matrix integration, which leads to seroma and other complications. ADM acts like a graft; it requires firm and healthy tissues to set in. In order to do so, there are three key steps to follow: (1) adequate patient selection; (2) preservative and gentle handling of intra-operative technique; and (3) meticulous post-operative management.

Pectoral placement of tissue expanders affects inpatient opioid use.

Prepectoral breast reconstruction promises to minimize breast animation deformity and decrease pain associated with subpectoral dissection and tissue expansion. This latter benefit is particularly timely given the ongoing opioid epidemic; however, this theoretical benefit remains to be demonstrated clinically. As such, this study aimed to compare inpatient opioid use and prescription practices following prepectoral and subpectoral expander-based breast reconstruction. A retrospective review was performed of patients undergoing immediate tissue expander placement between January 2017 and April 2018. Medical records were reviewed for surgical details, 24-hour inpatient PRN opioid usage (oral morphine equivalents [OME]), and discharge prescriptions. Comparisons were made using chi-squared and student's t tests where appropriate. Two hundred and thirty-one patients were identified, (mean age 48.8 years), 222 of which met inclusion criteria. 89 underwent subpectoral and 133 prepectoral tissue expander placements. All but two subpectoral patients and two prepectoral patients were opioid-naïve. The rate of bilateral procedures did not differ between cohorts (P = .194). Overall, 94% of patients were discharged within 24 hours, and length of stay did not differ between cohorts (P = .0753). Two subpectoral and two prepectoral patients required prolonged admission due to postoperative pain. All patients were ordered standing acetaminophen, celecoxib, and gabapentin, and subpectoral patients cyclobenzaprine. Narcotic pain medication was offered on an "as needed" (PRN) basis. Opioid usage within the first 24-hours was halved in the prepectoral cohort (22.2 vs 44.5 OME, P = .0003), which was not associated with bi/unilaterality of procedure or the presence of any psychiatric conditions. The amount of opioids prescribed on discharge was not significantly different between cohorts (308.42 OME prepectoral vs 336.99 subpectoral, P = .3197). Prepectoral expander placement appears to be associated with decreased inpatient opioid use postoperatively. This may represent an opportunity to improve patient satisfaction and safety by decreasing outpatient opioid prescriptions.

Innovations and advancements with prosthetic breast reconstruction.

Prosthetic breast reconstruction has evolved over the years to provide results that now mimic that of a natural breast. This is due to a variety of innovations and advancements related to mastectomy techniques, acellular dermal matrices, autologous fat grafting, and improved breast implants. The evolution of prosthetic breast reconstruction has gone full-circle and included prepectoral placement in the 1970s and 80s, partial or total subpectoral placement from 1985 to 2015, and now gradually trending back to prepectoral. There are several techniques and strategies that now allow for patients to achieve results that are superior to any time over the past 50 years. This manuscript will review the salient aspects of prosthetic breast reconstruction and how its evolution has progressed over the years.

Prophylactic absorbable antibiotic beads for prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: A single institution early experience.

Infection after implant-based breast reconstruction remains challenging, with infection rates up to 24%. Best clinical practice indicates prophylactic oral antibiotics are ineffective at preventing infection. Absorbable antibiotic beads have been routinely used in other surgical subspecialties such as orthopedic and vascular procedures for continuous local antibiotic delivery to the surgical site when implants are placed. Biodegradable calcium sulfate antibiotic beads have been shown to normalize incidence of infection when used prophylactically for a high-risk prepectoral patient population. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of prophylactic biodegradable antibiotic beads when used non-selectively for all prepectoral immediate tissue expander (TE) reconstruction. Patients who underwent mastectomy and immediate prepectoral TE reconstruction on the same day between 2018 and 2024 were reviewed. Patients were divided into two groups: those who received antibiotic beads (Group 1) and those who did not (Group 2). Absorbable calcium-sulfate beads were reconstituted with 1 g vancomycin and 240 mg gentamicin. There were 33 patients (63 TEs) in Group 1 and 330 patients (545 TEs) in Group 2. TE loss was present in 1.5% (1/65 TEs) Group 1 compared to 9.4% (51/545 TEs) in Group 2 (p = 0.032). The mean follow-up time was 178 days (range 93-266 days). Prophylactic biodegradable antibiotic beads used during immediate tissue expander reconstruction decreased implant loss rate. There was one occurrence of SSI in the antibiotic bead group. Antibiotic beads may potentially decrease complications in immediate TE reconstruction when used non-selectively for all patients.

Surgical and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Mastectomy and Implant-Based Prepectoral Reconstruction Using TIGR® Synthetic Mesh.

Background Single-stage direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction after mastectomy has gained popularity over the last decade, thanks to the wide use of biological matrices and synthetic meshes. Despite their high cost, there is no evidence of superior outcome from the biological matrices compared to the synthetic meshes. In this study, we aimed to evaluate our experience with TIGR, a synthetic, long-term absorbable mesh, in mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (MIBR) with a focus on patient-reported outcomes (PROMs). Methods This was a single-trust prospective quality improvement study conducted between 2017 and 2019. The main objectives were complication rates including infection, implant loss, and other surgical complications in patients undergoing TIGR mesh-assisted MIBR in the prepectoral plane for either cancer or risk reduction. PROMs were measured using the validated European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) breast questionnaire module. Clinical evaluations were conducted at one week, three weeks, and 12 months postoperatively. All patients provided written consent, and the audit was registered with the Quality Improvement Department of the organization. Results One hundred and twelve meshes were used in 93 patients with a mean age of 49 (24-75) years and a body mass index (BMI) of 23.4 (19.1-29.6). During the follow-up period, complications occurred in 26 patients (28%), including infection in four (4.3%), complete skin flap necrosis in one (1%), partial flap necrosis in three (3.2%), and implant loss in four (4.3%) patients. PROM data from 41 individuals indicated a moderate overall quality of life (82.7%), with high functional domain scores with relatively lower emotional functioning scores. Symptom domains generally scored poorly except for body image and sexual functioning. Conclusion Mastectomy and immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction using TIGR mesh is safe with low major complication rates. It is associated with high functional and quality of life scores but low scores in symptom domains which could be multifactorial. However, limitations due to study type and follow-up duration suggest caution in generalizing findings.

Impact of polyurethane versus acellular dermal matrix coating on prepectoral reconstruction outcomes: Interface does matter.

BACKGROUND: Interfaces continue to be used in prepectoral breast reconstruction to refine breast appearance, but more clinical data are required to assess their effectiveness. This study compares the rates of capsular contracture, breast esthetics, and patient satisfaction between two commonly used interface materials, acellular dermal matrix (ADM) and polyurethane (PU) foam. METHODS: A cross-sectional assessment was conducted on all patients who underwent prepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction with an interface material between June 2018 and June 2022. We compared capsular contracture rates (assessed in-person), esthetic outcomes (evaluated by a three-member panel using a specially designed scale), and patient satisfaction (measured using the Breast-Q questionnaire) among the members of the interface groups. RESULTS: Among the 79 reconstructed breasts (20 bilateral cases), 35 were reconstructed using ADM and 44 using PU implants. The ADM group had a significantly higher frequency of Baker III/IV capsular contracture compared with the PU group (14.3% vs. 0%, p = 0.014) and lower ratings from the panel in terms of capsular contracture (median 3.7 vs. 4.0, p < 0.001). PU reconstructions scored worse in implant visibility (median 2.3 vs. 3.3, p < 0.001) and rippling (median 3.0 vs. 3.7, p < 0.001). However, after appropriate adjustment for confounders, no significant differences in overall appearance and patient satisfaction were found. CONCLUSIONS: ADM reconstructions are prone to capsular contracture with all their related esthetic issues, but PU implants have certain cosmetic flaws, such as implant visibility and malposition. Since each technique has its own limitations, neither the experienced surgeons nor patients exhibited a clear preference for either approach.

Prepectoral Direct-To-Implant One-Stage Reconstruction With ADMs: Safety and Outcome in "Thin Patients".

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral direct-to-implant reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) represents a safe, fast, and successful option in breast reconstruction in a selected cohort of patients. Nowadays, this procedure is considered challenging in thin. Meanwhile, his cohort has not been accurately analyzed yet. METHODS: A single institution retrospective cohort study was performed between January 2019 and March 2023 in all women who underwent mastectomy. Biometrical and clinical data were recorded. Also, surgical technique, operating room (OR) time, mastectomy weights, implant choice, and acellular dermal matrix (ADM) types were properly noted. Postoperative complications represented the main topic: these were classified into early and late ones based on onset time. At least 12-month follow-up was required. A comparison between thin and ideal body mass index (BMI) populations was performed. RESULTS: Early complications did not seem to differ between the 2 groups with 37.8% and 38.9% of women having at least 1 early complication in thin and ideal-weight women, respectively (P = .919). In univariable regression analysis, compared with women with a BMI of 22.1 to 25.0, women with a BMI ≤ 22.0 were associated with an increased risk of late complications of 2.84 (1.13-7.14). Specifically, thin women appeared to have a 3-fold increased risk (OR = 2.97, 95% CI 1.08-8.18) of ripples/wrinkles compared with women with ideal weight. CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral reconstruction with ADM in thin patients may be considered as safe as in standard BMI patients. Rippling may be more frequent, but, whenever needed, easy to correct with a few sessions of lipo-grafts. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Immediate breast reconstruction by prepectoral polyurethane implant: Preliminary results of the prospective study PreQ-20.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, mastectomy and reconstruction techniques have evolved towards less aggressive procedures, improving the satisfaction and quality of life of women. For this reason, mastectomy has become a valid option for both women with breast cancer and high-risk women. The objective of this study is to analyze the safety of mastectomy and immediate prepectoral reconstruction with polyurethane implant in women with breast cancer and risk reduction. METHOD: Observational prospective study to evaluate the feasibility and safety of immediate reconstruction using prepectoral polyurethane implant. All women (with breast cancer or high risk for breast cancer) who underwent skin-sparing or skin-and-nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction with a prepectoral polyurethane implant were included. Women with breast sarcomas, disease progression during primary systemic therapy (PST), delayed, autologous or retropectoral reconstruction, and those who did not wish to participate in the study were excluded. Surgical procedures were performed by both senior and junior surgeons. All patients received the corresponding complementary treatments. All adverse events that occurred during follow-up and the risk factors for developing them were analyzed. RESULTS: 159 reconstructions were performed in 102 women, 80.4% due to breast carcinoma. Fourteen patients developed complications, the most frequent being seroma and wound dehiscence. Eight women required a reoperation (5.0%), seven of them due to implant exposure. Four reconstructions (2.5%) resulted in loss of the implant. Three patients progressed from their oncological process: a local relapse in the mastectomy flap, an axillary progression and a systemic progression. CONCLUSIONS: Prepectoral reconstruction with a polyurethane implant is a procedure with a low incidence of postoperative complications (8.8%) and implant loss (2.5%). Its use is safe with perioperative cancer treatments (neoadjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy).

Decreased postoperative pain and opioid use following prepectoral versus subpectoral breast reconstruction after mastectomy: A retrospective cohort study: Pain after pre- versus subpectoral reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral (PP) breast reconstruction is now commonly performed and minimizes dissection of the pectoralis major muscle. Data are lacking comparing the immediate postoperative recovery of these patients as compared with traditional subpectoral (SP) breast reconstruction. METHODS: From December 2015 to February 2017, 73 patients underwent PP prosthetic-based reconstruction at a single academic institution. PP cases were matched 1:1, by age and stage, to patients undergoing traditional SP reconstruction. Analysis of postoperative pain (visual analog scale) and opioid use (oral morphine equivalents, OME), was performed with both bi- and multivariate analyses. Additional outcomes explored included length of stay (LOS) and reconstructive intervention by plane of prosthetic reconstruction. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients were included in the final cohort. PP reconstruction was associated with higher rates of direct-to-implant reconstruction (84.9% vs. 34.3%, p <0.001) and higher rates of initial prosthetic fill (401.53 mL vs. 280.88 mL, p<0.001). Patients undergoing PP reconstruction had significantly reduced postoperative pain (4.29 vs. 5.44, p<0.001) and in-hospital opioid use (62.63 mg OME vs. 98.84 mg OME, p = 0.03) compared with SP patients. This result remained in multivariate analysis for both pain (3.94 vs. 5.25, p<0.001) and opioid use (17.14 mg OME vs. 63.03 mg OME, p = 0.03). Additionally, patients undergoing PP reconstruction had significantly reduced overall LOS on multivariate analysis (21.36 vs. 26.28 h, p = 0.02). CONCLUSION: Following mastectomy, PP breast reconstruction results in significantly reduced pain, opioid use, and hospital LOS compared with SP reconstruction.

The Journey of Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction through Time.

BACKGROUND: The facet of breast reconstruction has evolved from complex surgery to simple implant-based breast reconstruction. Minimal invasive surgery or Prepectoral breast reconstruction has revolutionised the surgical treatment for breast cancer and became a reality due to advances in meshes and implants. In this review, we have looked at the journey of Prepectoral implant beast reconstruction through time. METHODS: We conducted a literature review on pre-pectoral breast reconstruction, emphasising types of cover, its outcomes, complications, and the effect of postmastectomy radiotherapy. RESULTS: Prepectoral breast reconstruction had advanced with time and appears to be a safe and effective method of breast reconstruction and is associated with minimal morbidity whilst providing adequate cosmesis. Radiotherapy seems to be well tolerated with early favourable results. The Implant loss rates in the Acellular Dermal Matrix (ADM) to be around 5%-6% and rippling appear to be a common adverse effect of this technique ranging from 0%-35% in various studies. CONCLUSION: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction has emerged as a successful method of breast reconstruction.

Immediate prepectoral implant reconstruction using TiLOOP Bra Pocket results in improved patient satisfaction over dual plane reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based reconstruction accounts for the majority of breast reconstructive procedures performed in Australia. More recently, immediate prepectoral implant reconstruction using the TiLOOP Bra Pocket has gained popularity. This study compares post-surgical complications and patient-reported quality of life outcomes between immediate prepectoral and dual plane implant reconstruction. METHODS: A retrospective study of 80 consecutive patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomies and immediate implant reconstruction was conducted. Implants were either completely covered with TiLOOP Bra and/or TiLOOP Bra Pocket (pfm medical, Cologne, Germany) and secured in the prepectoral space (prepectoral group) or placed in the subpectoral plane with inferolateral mesh coverage (dual plane group). Data surrounding patient demographics, clinical details and post-surgical outcomes were compared. Patient-related quality of life outcomes were assessed with the Breast-Q questionnaire. RESULTS: A total of 80 patients (109 breasts) operated on between June 2016 and December 2018 were included. The prepectoral and dual plane groups comprised of 40 patients each, including 50 and 59 operated breasts, respectively. Post-operative complications were comparable with 11 (22%) overall complications in the prepectoral group and eight (14%) in the dual plane group (P = 0.313). Implant loss was uncommon with four (8%) cases in the prepectoral group and five (8.5%) in the dual plane group (P = 0.929). Patient-reported quality of life outcomes were superior after prepectoral reconstruction with patients reporting a significantly higher score in the satisfaction with breasts domain (68.9 versus 57.5; P = 0.036). CONCLUSION: Immediate prepectoral implant reconstruction with the TiLOOP Bra Pocket was associated with improved patient satisfaction and demonstrated no difference in early post-operative outcomes.

Prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction with polyurethane foam-coated implants: Feasibility and early results in risk-reducing and therapeutic mastectomies.

BACKGROUND: There is a renewed interest for prepectoral reconstruction. We aimed to describe the feasibility and the early complications associated with immediate one-stage direct-to-implant (DTI) reconstruction using prepectoral anatomical polyurethane (PU) foam-coated implants alone, for women with breast cancer or mutation carriers undergoing risk-reducing surgery. METHODS: We performed a single-center, retrospective review of 50 patients (mean age of 49 years), who underwent skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and immediate prepectoral PU implant-based reconstruction. All procedures were performed by the same senior operator, from July 2018 to March 2020. RESULTS: A total of 64 mastectomies (25 SSMs and 39 NSMs) with one-stage prepectoral PU foam-coated implant reconstruction were performed. Out of 50 patients, 6 required surgical revision within 30 days, because of hematoma (2), wound dehiscence (2) infection (1), and full thickness nipple-areolar complex (NAC) necrosis (1). Four patients developed a cutaneous rash with spontaneous resolution. Statistical analysis showed a significant influence of hypothyroidism and previous radiotherapy on the risk of complications. The association with prior radiotherapy (pRT) was not significant using binary logistic regression. When excluding oncological reasons and patient's wish for NAC excision, our decision to perform an NSM was influenced by breast cup size, preoperative measurements, and breast weight. CONCLUSIONS: Early experience with immediate prepectoral DTI reconstruction with PU-covered implants alone suggests that it is a reliable procedure. Prior breast irradiation does not increase postoperative complication rates in our series. NAC preservation was decided according to preoperative lower breast measurements.

Funnel usefulness in direct-to-implant breast reconstruction using periareolar incision with prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with acellular dermal matrix.

BACKGROUND: The funnel has been used in esthetic breast surgery that requires a small incision. Recent advances in minimally invasive surgical techniques have led to more cases of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) through periareolar incision. However, prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is almost impossible with the periareolar approach. Funnels can also be useful for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. METHODS: NSM with periareolar incision and direct-to-implant breast reconstruction were performed with prepectoral implant placement between January 2017 and July 2019. The ADM full-wrapped anatomic textured implant was inserted using a funnel without additional incisions during surgery. RESULTS: A total of 21 patients were enrolled, including 2 who received bilateral breast reconstruction. All operations were successfully performed using funnels with minimal periareolar incisions. Anatomic textured implants (mean: 251.7 cc, range: 90-450 cc) wrapped in ADM can be effectively inserted in the prepectoral plane using a funnel. Two patients experienced delayed wound healing of the areola that was treated by conservative wound management. Patients also experienced less pain overall, and the cosmetic result was very good. Patient satisfaction scores were also very high. CONCLUSIONS: While the periareolar incision is esthetically pleasing, additional resection is often necessary. However, the use of funnels ensured that no additional incision was needed even in large implants. This subsequently led to better results in terms of pain and scarring. Prepectoral breast reconstruction involving complete implant coverage with ADM using a funnel through the periareolar approach represents a good alternative to the traditional dual plane subpectoral method. This method provides good patient satisfaction without adverse outcomes.

Optimizing perioperative strategies to maximize success with prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Implant based reconstruction is still the most commonly employed method of post mastectomy reconstruction in the United States and internationally. Mastectomy techniques are improving, and adjuncts such as tissue perfusion technology and biologic implants allow for re-evaluation of traditional reconstructive methods. Subpectoral implant placement is used in a large majority of patients undergoing implant based reconstruction. However, with the advent of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), a "sling" for the expander and implant can be placed with surgical precision to create the optimal breast pocket. This has allowed for placement of the breast prosthesis in a prepectoral anatomic plane. The benefits are clear: avoidance of animation deformities and a significant decrease in pain that results from pectoralis mobilization and spasm. Here, we discuss specific techniques to avoid pitfalls and optimize aesthetic results with prepectoral breast reconstruction. Patient selection, intra-operative mastectomy flap evaluation, modifications in expander and implant fill, and technique specifics all play a critical role in this new, and rapidly growing method for implant based breast reconstruction.

The breast surgeons' approach to mastectomy and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

The purpose of this review article is to discuss and highlight the data, techniques and our experience performing mastectomies in the setting of prepectoral breast reconstruction. Using a systematic review of the approach to mastectomy in the oncologic setting encompassing patient selection, safety, anatomy and methods including a literature review of mastectomy trends, safety data and outcomes, anatomy and our experience, we are able to illustrate the safety and utility of this technique. The literature strongly supports the oncologic safety of these methods. This review also supports the use of these techniques as a surgical approach to any mastectomy, with or without reconstruction, and addresses many of the factors involved in improving and maximizing outcomes. While, there are multiple and equally efficacious approaches to mastectomy, several surgical techniques can be used to improve outcomes and ensure optimal flap viability.

A retrospective comparative analysis of risk factors and outcomes in direct-to-implant and two-stages prepectoral breast reconstruction: BMI and radiotherapy as new selection criteria of patients.

Recently prepectoral breast reconstruction (PBR) has showed acceptable outcomes in the short-term. There are few evidence on long-term results and variables which could influence surgical safety. So far, no specific guidelines or indications have been developed for prepectoral technique and heterogeneous inclusion criteria had been used in previous reports. This study revises a series of 397 patients. We conducted a retrospective comparative analysis of risk factors and outcomes between patients undergoing direct to-implant (DTI) and patients undergoing two-stages expander-assisted (TSE) PBR. Univariate binary logistic regression was performed to investigate the association between the incidence of postoperative and aesthetic complications and several variables. 521 breasts were included in the analysis, with an average follow-up of 38 months. 210 patients underwent DTI and 187 TSE PBR. No statistical differences were found between the two populations in term of the characteristics of patients, surgeries and outcomes. Binary logistic regression found no significant association in the TSE group. In the DTI group, a significant association was found between surgical complications and BMI and adjuvant radiotherapy. The association remained significant only for BMI, when investigated with the onset of aesthetic complications. Lower BMI and adjuvant radiotherapy are significantly associated to a higher risk of developing a surgical complication in DTI PBR. Patients at lowest BMI with DTI are prone to develop an aesthetic complication. According to this analysis, we suggest to carefully choose candidates for PBR and propose new selection criteria for subcutaneous techniques.

Subcutaneous expanders and synthetic mesh for breast reconstruction: Long-term and patient-reported BREAST-Q outcomes of a single-center prospective study.

Recently, prepectoral breast reconstruction is experiencing a revival. Despite the growing body of early reports about subcutaneous breast reconstruction, literature lacks in long-term results and studies focusing on patient-reported outcomes and health-related quality of life. Between January 2012 and December 2016, patients undergoing mastectomy were enrolled at our institution. We selected patients diagnosed with breast cancer or genetic predisposition to breast cancer, undergoing conservative mastectomy, either nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy, and willing for prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction assisted by a synthetic mesh. Exclusion criteria were body mass index greater than 35 kg/m2 and pregnancy. BREAST-Q questionnaire was administered prior to surgery and after 1 year. Capsular contracture was evaluated using Baker scale. Oncological, surgical, and esthetic outcomes along with the changes in BREAST-Q score were analyzed over time. One hundred eighty-seven patients were enrolled, with an average age of 55.5 years. One hundred thirty-seven unilateral mastectomy and 50 bilateral mastectomy procedures were performed, accounting for a total of 237 operated breasts. The average follow-up period after the second stage was 36.5 months. Postoperative complications that require a second operation occurred in 16 cases (6.7%) (4 wound dehiscence, 2 skin-nipple necrosis, 7 infections, and 3 seroma cases). A locoregional recurrence occurred in 3 cases (1.9%) and a systemic recurrence occurred in 2 cases (1.3%). Patients scored high level of satisfaction with outcome. Overall satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, and sexual well-being was all significantly increased after the surgery (p < 0.05). Two-stage expander reconstruction technique provides the preservation of the pectoralis major muscle with an acceptable rate of complications. We confirm satisfactory patient-reported and esthetic results, with high patient comfort.