Mastectomy with one-stage or two-stage reconstruction in breast cancer: analysis of early outcomes and patient's satisfaction

被引:7
|
作者
Angela, Gurrado [1 ,3 ]
Alessandro, Pasculli [1 ]
Alessia, Toma [1 ]
Michele, Maruccia [2 ,3 ]
Rossella, Elia [2 ,3 ]
Marco, Moschetta [2 ,3 ]
Michele, Telegrafo [2 ,3 ]
Massimiliano, De Luca Giuseppe [1 ]
Walter, Lavermicocca [1 ]
Elisabetta, Poli [1 ]
Paolo, Prete Francesco [1 ]
Ilaria, Sgaramella Lucia [1 ]
Giuseppe, Giudice [1 ,3 ]
Mario, Testini [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Med Sch Aldo Moro Bari, Policlin Hosp Bari, Acad Unit Gen Surg, Dept Biomed Sci & Human Oncol, PZza G Cesare 11, I-70124 Bari, Italy
[2] Univ Med Sch Aldo Moro Bari, Dept Emergency & Organ Transplantat, Bari, Italy
[3] Policlin Hosp Bari, Breast Unit, Bari, Italy
关键词
Breast cancer; Skin sparing mastectomy; Nipple-sparing mastectomy; Breast reconstruction; One-stage breast reconstruction; Two-stage breast reconstruction; ACELLULAR DERMAL MATRIX; DIRECT-TO-IMPLANT; COMPLICATIONS; PLACEMENT; RISK;
D O I
10.1007/s13304-022-01416-0
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Aim of this study is to compare early post-operative outcomes and patient's satisfaction after skin-sparing and/or nipple-sparing mastectomy (SSM/SNSM) followed either by breast reconstruction with one-stage prepectoral implantation or two-stage technique for breast cancer (BC) or BRCA1/2 mutation. From January 2018 to December 2021, 96 patients (mean age of 51.12 +/- 10.9) underwent SSM/SNSM and were divided into two groups: in group A (65 patients, 67.7%), mastectomy was followed by one-stage reconstruction; in group B (31 patients, 32.3%) by two-stage. Operative time was significantly longer in A vs. B (307.6 +/- 95.7 vs. 254.4 +/- 90.91; P < 0.05). Previous breast surgery was more common in B vs. A (29.0% vs. 7.7%; P < 0.05), while bilateral surgery was performed more frequently in A vs. B (40% vs. 6.5%; P = 0.001). All SSM/SNSM for BRCA1/2 mutation were followed by immediate prepectoral implantation. No significant differences were found between groups in terms of post-operative complications. At pathology, DCIS and invasive ST forms, such as multicentric/multifocal forms, were detected more frequently in B, while NST type in A (all P < 0.05). A multivariate analysis showed improved post-operative satisfaction at BREAST-Q survey in Group A (P = 0.001). Encouraging oncologic outcomes after SSM/SNSM for BC enabled the improvement of breast reconstructive techniques. One-stage reconstruction is characterized by better aesthetic outcomes and by greater patient's satisfaction. When SSM/SNSM is technically difficult to perform, as in multicentric/multifocal forms or previous breast surgery, mastectomy followed by two-stage reconstruction should be considered to achieve a radical surgery.
引用
收藏
页码:235 / 243
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Outcomes and quality of life in immediate one-stage versus two-stage breast reconstructions without an acellular dermal matrix: 17-years of experience
    Dimovska, Eleonora O. F.
    Chen, Courtney
    Chou, Hsu-Huan
    Lin, Yi-Ling
    Cheng, Ming-Huei
    JOURNAL OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2021, 124 (04) : 510 - 520
  • [22] Patient satisfaction in one-stage immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy A multi-center comparative patient evaluation of prosthesis, LDMF, and TRAM techniques
    Lei, Chuqi
    Xu, Lijie
    Xu, Feng
    Li, Jie
    Jiang, Hongchuan
    Guan, Shan
    Wang, Xiang
    Wen, Bing
    Li, Jinfeng
    Li, Xiru
    Geng, Cuizhi
    Yin, Jian
    MEDICINE, 2020, 99 (22) : E19991
  • [23] A Comparison of Elliptical Mastectomy to Inverted-T Pattern Mastectomy in Two-Stage Prosthetic Breast Reconstruction
    Kilgo, Matthew S.
    Kaufman, Gabriel J.
    Shen, Allison E.
    Korsh, Jessica
    Baranchuk, Nadia V.
    Douglas, Barry K.
    Brewer, Bruce W.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2015, 136 (04) : 426E - 433E
  • [24] Delayed two-stage breast reconstruction: The impact of radiotherapy
    Hoejvig, Jens H.
    Pedersen, Nicolas J.
    Gramkow, Christina S.
    Bredgaard, Rikke
    Kroman, Niels
    Bonde, Christian T.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2019, 72 (11) : 1763 - 1768
  • [25] Analyzing Regional Differences over a 15-Year Trend of One-Stage versus Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction in 941,191 Postmastectomy Patients
    Kamali, Parisa
    Koolen, Pieter G. L.
    Ibrahim, Ahmed M. S.
    Paul, Marek A.
    Dikmans, Rieky E.
    Schermerhorn, Marc L.
    Lee, Bernard T.
    Lin, Samuel J.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2016, 138 (01) : 1E - 14E
  • [26] Quantifying the number of lymph nodes identified in one-stage versus two-stage axillary dissection in breast cancer
    Damgaard, Olaf E.
    Jensen, Maj-Britt
    Kroman, Niels
    Tvedskov, Tove F.
    BREAST, 2013, 22 (01) : 44 - 46
  • [27] A Cohort Analysis of Early Outcomes After AlloDerm, FlexHD, and SurgiMend Use in Two-Stage Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Chu, Jacqueline J.
    Nelson, Jonas A.
    Kokosis, George
    Haglich, Kathryn
    Mckernan, Cayla D.
    Rubenstein, Robyn
    Vingan, Perri S.
    Allen Jr, Robert J.
    Coriddi, Michelle R.
    Dayan, Joseph H.
    Disa, Joseph J.
    Mehrara, Babak J.
    Matros, Evan
    AESTHETIC SURGERY JOURNAL, 2023, 43 (12) : 1491 - 1498
  • [28] Breast Reconstruction Following Mastectomy; Patient's Satisfaction
    Eric, M.
    Mihic, N.
    Krivokuca, D.
    ACTA CHIRURGICA BELGICA, 2009, 109 (02) : 159 - 166
  • [29] Comparative study of patient outcomes between direct to implant and two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy
    Caputo, Glenda Giorgia
    Vigato, Enrico
    Cordaro, Emanuele Rampino
    Parodi, Pier Camillo
    Governa, Maurizio
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2021, 74 (10) : 2573 - 2579
  • [30] Two-stage prepectoral breast reconstruction: A comprehensive review and meta-analysis
    Di Giuli, Riccardo
    Cavallero, Mattia F.
    Ferrari, Camilla
    Vaccari, Stefano
    Bucci, Flavio
    Bandi, Valeria
    Klinger, Francesco M.
    Vinci, Valeriano
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2025, 104 : 388 - 397