Download PDF
CC BY 4.0 · Arch Plast Surg 2024; 51(05): 466-473
DOI: 10.1055/a-2358-8864
Breast/Trunk: Original Article

Impact of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy and Preoperative Irradiation on Early Complications in Direct-to-Implant Breast Reconstruction

Ji Won Hwang 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Su Min Kim 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Jin-Woo Park 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
,
Kyong-Je Woo 
1   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital, Seoul, South Korea
2   Department of Plastic Surgery, Samsung Medical Center, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Seoul, South Korea
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Impact of previous radiation therapy and neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) on early complications in direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction has not been elucidated. This study investigated whether DTI reconstruction is viable in patients with NACT or a history of preoperative chest wall irradiation.

Methods Medical records of breast cancer patients who underwent nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy with DTI breast reconstruction from March 2018 to February 2021, with at least 1 year of follow-up in a single tertiary center, were reviewed. Demographic data, intraoperative details, and postoperative complications, including full-thickness necrosis, infection, and removal, were reviewed. Risk factors suggested by previous literature, including NACT and preoperative chest wall irradiation histories, were reviewed by multivariate analysis.

Results A total of 206 breast cancer patients were included, of which, 9 were bilateral, 8 patients (3.9%) had a history of prior chest wall irradiation, and 17 (8.6%) received NACT. From 215 cases, 11 cases (5.1%) required surgical intervention for full-thickness necrosis, while intravenous antibiotics or hospitalization was needed in 11 cases (5.1%), with 14 cases of failure (6.5%) reported. Using multivariable analysis, preoperative irradiation was found to significantly increase the risk of full-thickness skin necrosis (OR = 12.14, p = 0.034), and reconstruction failure (OR = 13.14, p = 0.005). NACT was not a significant risk factor in any of the above complications.

Conclusion DTI breast reconstruction is a viable option for patients who have received NACT, although reconstructive options should be carefully explored for patients with a history of breast irradiation.

Keywords

direct-to-implant reconstruction - complications - neoadjuvant chemotherapy - prior radiation history

Authors' Contributions

Conceptualization: K-J.W. Methodology: J.W.H., J-W.P., K-J.W. Writing—original draft: J.W.H., K-J.W. Writing—review and editing: S.M.K., J-W.P., K-J.W.


Ethical Approval

This retrospective cohort study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Ewha Womans University Mokdong Hospital (No. 2023-02-023).


Patient Consent

Informed consent of the patients was not necessary in this retrospective study.


Data Availability Statement

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.


Note

This study was presented at Research and Reconstruction Forum, 2023.




Publication History

Received: 31 May 2024

Accepted: 23 June 2024

Accepted Manuscript online:
02 July 2024

Article published online:
06 August 2024

© 2024. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Farhangkhoee H, Matros E, Disa J. Trends and concepts in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. J Surg Oncol 2016; 113 (08) 891-894
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 2 Hunsicker LM, Ashikari AY, Berry C, Koch RM, Salzberg CA. Short-term complications associated with acellular dermal matrix-assisted direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2017; 78 (01) 35-40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 3 Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, Medford-Davis L, Hertl C, Austen Jr WG. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128 (06) 1170-1178
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 4 Kaufmann M, Hortobagyi GN, Goldhirsch A. et al. Recommendations from an international expert panel on the use of neoadjuvant (primary) systemic treatment of operable breast cancer: an update. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24 (12) 1940-1949
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 5 Mitchem J, Herrmann D, Margenthaler JA, Aft RL. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on rate of tissue expander/implant loss and progression to successful breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Am J Surg 2008; 196 (04) 519-522
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 6 Riba J, de Romani SE, Masia J. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer treatment and the evidence-based interaction with immediate autologous and implant-based breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 2018; 45 (01) 25-31
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 7 Lee MC, Rogers K, Griffith K. et al. Determinants of breast conservation rates: reasons for mastectomy at a comprehensive cancer center. Breast J 2009; 15 (01) 34-40
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 8 Momoh AO, Ahmed R, Kelley BP. et al. A systematic review of complications of implant-based breast reconstruction with prereconstruction and postreconstruction radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21 (01) 118-124
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 9 Aliu O, Zhong L, Chetta MD. et al. Comparing health care resource use between implant and autologous reconstruction of the irradiated breast: a national claims-based assessment. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139 (06) 1224e-1231e
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 10 Riggio E, Toffoli E, Tartaglione C, Marano G, Biganzoli E. Local safety of immediate reconstruction during primary treatment of breast cancer. Direct-to-implant versus expander-based surgery. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2019; 72 (02) 232-242
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 11 Ataseven B, von Minckwitz G. The impact of neoadjuvant treatment on surgical options and outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23 (10) 3093-3099
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 12 Song J, Zhang X, Liu Q. et al. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on immediate breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2014; 9 (05) e98225
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 13 Lorentzen T, Heidemann LN, Möller S, Bille C. Impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on surgical complications in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol 2022; 48 (01) 44-52
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 14 Scardina L, Di Leone A, Biondi E. et al. Prepectoral vs. submuscular immediate breast reconstruction in patients undergoing mastectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: our early experience. J Pers Med 2022; 12 (09) 1533
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 15 Varghese J, Gohari SS, Rizki H. et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy on complications following immediate breast reconstruction. Breast 2021; 55: 55-62
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 16 Frey JD, Choi M, Karp NS. The effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy compared to adjuvant chemotherapy in healing after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139 (01) 10e-19e
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 17 Allué Cabañuz M, Arribas Del Amo MD, Gil Romea I, Val-Carreres Rivera MP, Sousa Domínguez R, Güemes Sánchez AT. Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a safe option?. Cir Esp (Engl Ed) 2019; 97 (10) 575-581
    PubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 18 Kracoff S, Allweis TM, Ben-Baruch N, Benkler M, Fadi S, Egozi D. Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy does not affect the immediate postoperative complication rate after breast reconstruction. Breast J 2019; 25 (03) 528-530
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 19 Kronowitz SJ, Robb GL. Radiation therapy and breast reconstruction: a critical review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124 (02) 395-408
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 20 McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E. et al. Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (06) 1886-1892
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 21 Spear SL, Boehmler JH, Bogue DP, Mafi AA. Options in reconstructing the irradiated breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 122 (02) 379-388
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 22 Hirsch EM, Seth AK, Dumanian GA. et al. Outcomes of tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction in the setting of prereconstruction radiation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2012; 129 (02) 354-361
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 23 Prantl L, Moellhoff N, von Fritschen U. et al. Effect of radiation therapy on microsurgical deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstructions: a matched cohort analysis of 4577 cases. Ann Plast Surg 2021; 86 (06) 627-631
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 24 Ascherman JA, Hanasono MM, Newman MI, Hughes DB. Implant reconstruction in breast cancer patients treated with radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 117 (02) 359-365
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar
  • 25 Li Y, Xu G, Yu N, Huang J, Long X. Prepectoral versus subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Ann Plast Surg 2020; 85 (04) 437-447
    CrossrefPubMedSearch in Google Scholar