Long-term outcomes of implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with and without radiotherapy: a population-based study

被引:18
|
作者
de Boniface, Jana [1 ,2 ]
Adam, Hannah Coude [1 ]
Frisell, Axel [1 ,3 ]
Oikonomou, Ira [4 ]
Ansarei, Dhirar [4 ]
Konstantinidou, Anna Ljung [1 ,2 ]
Liu, Yihang [1 ]
Alniaj, Basel Abo [5 ]
Wallmon, Paula [6 ]
Halle, Martin [1 ,7 ]
Johansson, Anna L., V [8 ,9 ]
Sackey, Helena [1 ,5 ]
机构
[1] Karolinska Inst, Dept Mol Med & Surg, Stockholm, Sweden
[2] Capio St Gorans Hosp, Dept Surg, Breast Ctr, Stockholm, Sweden
[3] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Dermatol & Venerol, Stockholm, Sweden
[4] South Gen Hosp, Dept Surg, Stockholm, Sweden
[5] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Breast Endocrine Tumours & Sarcoma, Stockholm, Sweden
[6] Orebro Univ Hosp, Dept Surg, Orebro, Sweden
[7] Karolinska Univ Hosp, Dept Reconstruct Plast Surg, Stockholm, Sweden
[8] Karolinska Inst, Dept Med Epidemiol & Biostat, Stockholm, Sweden
[9] Canc Registry Norway, Oslo, Norway
基金
瑞典研究理事会;
关键词
MULTICENTER; MASTECTOMY;
D O I
10.1093/bjs/znac283
中图分类号
R61 [外科手术学];
学科分类号
摘要
Background Radiotherapy (RT) is a risk factor for impaired outcomes after implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). Large studies including long-term follow-up are relatively scarce. The purpose of this analysis was to assess long-term effects of RT in implant-based IBR, distinguishing between implant removal because of postoperative complications versus patient preference. Methods This population-based cohort study included all patients with breast cancer who underwent implant-based IBR in Stockholm between 2005 and 2015. Data were collected through national registers and medical charts. The main endpoint was implant removal owing to postoperative complications (wound breakdown, infection, bleeding) or patient preference (dissatisfaction, pain, capsular contracture), with or without conversion to autologous reconstruction. Results Some 1749 implant-based IBRs in 1687 women were included. Median follow-up was 72 (range 1-198) months. Reconstructions were divided according to receipt of RT: No RT (n = 856, 48.9 per cent), adjuvant RT (n = 749, 42.8 per cent), and previous RT (n = 144, 8.2 per cent). Implant removal occurred after 266 reconstructions (15.2 per cent); 68 (7.9 per cent) in the no RT, 158 (21.1 per cent) in the adjuvant RT, and 40 (27.8 per cent) in the previous RT group. Implant removal was because of postoperative complications in 152 instances (57.1 per cent) and was most common in the first 3 years. This was especially observed in the previous RT group, where 15 of 23 implant removals occurred during the first 6 months. Implant removal owing to patient preference (114 of 266, 42.9 per cent) became more common with increasing follow-up. Conclusion Implant removal after implant-based IBR is significantly associated with RT. The reason for implant removal shifts over time from postoperative complications to patient preference. In this long-term follow-up of 1749 implant-based immediate breast reconstructions performed in Stockholm between 2005 and 2015, radiotherapy was a significant risk factor for implant removal. Implant removal because of postoperative complications was most common during the first 3 years, whereas implant removal owing to patient preference became increasingly common with increasing duration of follow-up. Lay Summary Irradiation of the chest wall after breast removal and implant placement (reconstruction) increases the risk of complications. These may lead to removal of the implant. Some women then choose a new breast reconstruction without an implant. The aim of this project was to find out how much irradiation affects complications after breast reconstruction using implants. This work used information on women who had a breast reconstruction with implants in Stockholm, Sweden, from 2005 to 2015. The main focus was on removal of the implant. This could be due to complications or patient preference. Implant removal could be with or without a new breast reconstruction. Of 1749 reconstructed breasts in 1687 women, 266 implants were removed. This was most often because of a complication, especially in the first years after surgery, but nearly as often due to patient wish. Implant removal owing to patient wish occurred later. Irradiation was a major factor increasing the risk of implant removal, together with, for example, smoking and obesity.
引用
收藏
页码:1107 / 1115
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Tolerance of latissimus dorsi in immediate breast reconstruction without implant to radiotherapy
    Berthet, G.
    Faure, C.
    Dammacco, M. A.
    Vermesch, C.
    Delay, E.
    Quoc, C. Ho
    Carrabin, N.
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2018, 71 (01) : 15 - 20
  • [32] Retrospective Study of Radiotherapy Impact on the Outcome of Material-assisted Implant-based Subpectoral Breast Reconstruction
    Ohlinger, Ralf
    Nawroth, Florian
    Kohlmann, Thomas
    Alwafai, Zaher
    Schueler, Katharina
    Zygmunt, Marek
    Paepke, Stefan
    ANTICANCER RESEARCH, 2021, 41 (04) : 2017 - 2024
  • [33] Commentary: Comparison of Outcomes in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: Acellular Dermal Matrix versus Inferior Dermal Flap
    Ribeiro, Luis Mata
    Meireles, Rita P.
    Brito, Iris M.
    Costa, Patricia M.
    Rebelo, Marco A.
    Barbosa, Rui F.
    Choupina, Miguel P.
    Pinho, Carlos J.
    Ribeiro, Matilde P.
    ARCHIVES OF PLASTIC SURGERY-APS, 2022, 49 (02): : 158 - 165
  • [34] Predictors of women's sexual outcomes after implant-based breast reconstruction
    van de Grift, Tim C.
    Mureau, Marc A. M.
    Negenborn, Vera N.
    Dikmans, Rieky E. G.
    Bouman, Mark-Bram
    Mullender, Margriet G.
    PSYCHO-ONCOLOGY, 2020, 29 (08) : 1272 - 1279
  • [35] Use of Antimicrobial Irrigation and Incidence of Capsular Contracture in Breast Augmentation and Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
    Federica, Giuzio
    Tommaso, Fabrizio
    Alessia, Catalano
    Agostino, Ceccarini
    Florian, Bodog
    Antonio, Giuliani
    Nicola, Massariello Domenico
    Abdallah, Raweh
    Carmela, Saturnino
    Lorenzo, Svolacchia
    Sergio, Brongo
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2023, 47 (06) : 2345 - 2350
  • [36] Postoperative Outcomes in Prepectoral Versus Retropectoral Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Across Body Mass Index Categories
    Zinner, Gauthier
    Martineau, Jerome
    Lam, Giang Thanh
    Correia, Daniel
    Kalbermatten, Daniel F.
    Oranges, Carlo M.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN, 2025, 13 (01) : e6425
  • [37] Immediate one-stage implant-based breast reconstruction without the use of acellular dermal matrix in Japanese breast cancer patients
    Okumura, Seiko
    Hyodo, Ikuo
    Iwata, HIroji
    Kamei, Yuzuru
    BREAST CANCER, 2020, 27 (04) : 759 - 764
  • [38] Immediate tissue expander or implant-based breast reconstruction does not compromise the oncologic delivery of post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT)
    Jethwa, Krishan R.
    Kahila, Mohamed M.
    Whitaker, Thomas J.
    Harmsen, William S.
    Corbin, Kimberly S.
    Park, Sean S.
    Yan, Elizabeth S.
    Lemaine, Valerie
    Boughey, Judy C.
    Mutter, Robert W.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2017, 164 (01) : 237 - 244
  • [39] Reducing Expansion Visits in Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Study of Prepectoral and Subpectoral Expander Placement
    Wormer, Blair A.
    Valmadrid, Al C.
    Kumar, Nishant Ganesh
    Al Kassis, Salam
    Rankin, Timothy M.
    Kaoutzanis, Christodoulos
    Higdon, Kent K.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2019, 144 (02) : 276 - 286
  • [40] Immediate Unilateral Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction does not Impair Pulmonary Functions: A Preliminary Prospective Study
    Har-Shai, Lior
    Franco, Eyal
    Shteinberg, Michal
    Adir, Yochai
    Ad-El, Dean
    Lavi, Idit
    Stein, Nili
    Har-Shai, Yaron
    Metanes, Issa
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2024, 48 (21) : 4388 - 4393