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
  • [41] Breast sensibility after mastectomy and implant-based breast reconstruction
    Bijkerk, E.
    van Kuijk, S. M. J.
    Beugels, J.
    Cornelissen, A. J. M.
    Heuts, E. M.
    van der Hulst, R. R. W. J.
    Tuinder, S. M. H.
    BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, 2019, 175 (02) : 369 - 378
  • [42] Breast sensibility after mastectomy and implant-based breast reconstruction
    E. Bijkerk
    S. M. J. van Kuijk
    J. Beugels
    A. J. M. Cornelissen
    E. M. Heuts
    R. R. W. J. van der Hulst
    S. M. H. Tuinder
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2019, 175 : 369 - 378
  • [43] Long-term Patient-Reported Outcomes in Older Breast Cancer Survivors: A Population-Based Survey Study
    Swanick, Cameron W.
    Lei, Xiudong
    Xu, Ying
    Shen, Yu
    Goodwin, Nathan A.
    Smith, Grace L.
    Giordano, Sharon H.
    Hunt, Kelly K.
    Jagsi, Reshma
    Shaitelman, Simona F.
    Peterson, Susan K.
    Smith, Benjamin D.
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RADIATION ONCOLOGY BIOLOGY PHYSICS, 2018, 100 (04): : 882 - 890
  • [44] Use of Inguinal Hernia Mesh (DynaMesh-ENDOLAP) in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction
    Ramesh Omranipour
    Marzieh Mohammadizavieh
    Sadaf Alipour
    Aesthetic Plastic Surgery, 2022, 46 : 677 - 682
  • [45] Use of Inguinal Hernia Mesh (DynaMesh-ENDOLAP) in Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction
    Omranipour, Ramesh
    Mohammadizavieh, Marzieh
    Alipour, Sadaf
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2022, 46 (02) : 677 - 682
  • [46] The Partner Perspective on Autologous and Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction
    von Glinski, Maxi
    Holler, Nikla
    Kuemmel, Sherko
    Wallner, Christoph
    Wagner, Johannes Maximilian
    Sogorski, Alexander
    Reinkemeier, Felix
    Reinisch, Mattea
    Lehnhardt, Marcus
    Behr, Bjoern
    AESTHETIC PLASTIC SURGERY, 2023, 47 (04) : 1324 - 1331
  • [47] Immediate Single Stage Implant-based Breast Reconstruction with or Without TIGR Mesh in Iranian Patients Undergoing Mastectomy: A Quasi-experimental Study
    Nafissi, Nahid
    Bagheri, Ayoub
    Vaseghi, Hamed
    Shojaee, Leyla
    Zolnouri, Mina
    Pompei, Stefano
    Tayefi, Batool
    INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CANCER MANAGEMENT, 2023, 16 (01)
  • [48] Comparison of immediate postoperative pain in implant-based breast reconstructions
    Gassman, Andrew A.
    Yoon, Alfred P.
    Festekjian, Jaco
    Da Lio, Andrew L.
    Tseng, Charles Y.
    Crisera, Chris
    JOURNAL OF PLASTIC RECONSTRUCTIVE AND AESTHETIC SURGERY, 2016, 69 (05) : 604 - 616
  • [49] A Guide to Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction: A New Dimension to Implant-based Breast Reconstruction
    Vidya, Raghavan
    Iqbal, Fahad Mujtaba
    CLINICAL BREAST CANCER, 2017, 17 (04) : 266 - 271
  • [50] Stability of Long-Term Outcomes in Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: An Evaluation of 12-Year Surgeon- and Patient-Reported Outcomes in 3489 Nonirradiated and Irradiated Implants
    Seth, Akhil K.
    Cordeiro, Peter G.
    PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY, 2020, 146 (03) : 474 - 484