BackgroundPostmastectomy reconstruction using a deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap is increasingly being performed in patients with breast cancer. The procedure induces extensive tissue trauma, and it has been hypothesized that the release of growth factors, angiogenic agonists and immunomodulating factors may reactivate dormant micrometastasis. The aim of the present study was to estimate the risk of breast cancer recurrence in patients undergoing DIEP flap reconstruction compared with that in patients treated with mastectomy alone.MethodsEach patient who underwent delayed DIEP flap reconstruction at Karolinska University Hospital, Sweden, between 1999 and 2013, was compared with up to four controls with breast cancer who did not receive a DIEP flap. The control patients were selected using incidence density matching with respect to age, tumour and nodal status, neoadjuvant therapy and year of mastectomy. The primary endpoint was breast cancer‐specific survival. Survival analysis was carried out using Kaplan–Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazard regression analysis.ResultsThe analysis included 250 patients who had 254 DIEP flap reconstructions and 729 control patients. Median follow‐up was 89 and 75 months respectively (P = 0·053). Breast cancer recurrence developed in 50 patients (19·7 per cent) in the DIEP group and 174 (23·9 per cent) in the control group (P = 0·171). The 5‐year breast cancer‐specific survival rate was 92·0 per cent for patients with a DIEP flap and 87·9 per cent in controls (P = 0·032). Corresponding values for 5‐year overall survival were 91·6 and 84·7 per cent (P < 0·001). After adjustment for tumour and patient characteristics and treatment, patients without DIEP flap reconstruction had significantly lower overall but not breast cancer‐specific survival.ConclusionThe present findings do not support the hypothesis that patients with breast cancer undergoing DIEP flap reconstruction have a higher rate of breast cancer recurrence than those who have mastectomy alone.
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.
Background
Current evidence for the effects of radiotherapy (RT) on implant-based immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is limited by short follow-up and lack of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). It is central to integrate long-term comprehensive outcome data into the preoperative decision-making process. The aim of the present study was to determine long-term surgical outcomes and PROs in relation to RT after implant-based IBR.
Methods
This was a longitudinal cohort study of PRO data obtained in surveys conducted in 2012 and 2020 using the BREAST-Q questionnaire. All women undergoing therapeutic mastectomy and implant-based IBR between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2011 at four breast centres in Stockholm, Sweden, were identified. The endpoint was implant removal owing to surgical complications or patient preference.
Results
Median follow-up was 120 (range 1–171) months. After 754 IBRs in 729 women, implant removal occurred in 128 (17 per cent): 34 of 386 (8.8 per cent) in the no-RT group, 20 of 64 (31.3 per cent) in the group with previous RT, and 74 of 304 (24.3 per cent) in the postoperative RT group (P < 0.001). Implant removal was because of surgical complications in 60 instances (7.9 per cent), and patient preference in 68 (9.0 per cent). The BREAST-Q response rate was 72.2 per cent. Women with previous RT scored lower than those without RT on all scales, apart from psychosocial well-being. Women with postoperative RT scored lower only on physical well-being. No scores in the two RT groups had deteriorated between the survey time points, whereas satisfaction with breasts and overall outcome had decreased in the no-RT group.
Conclusion
Although RT was significantly associated with higher implant removal rates, PROs remained stable over 8 years despite irradiation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.