Introduction: Breast cancer is the leading cause of neoplasm mortality among women. Several prevention strategies have been implemented to early detect and prevent the cancer occurrence. The most effective protocol includes prevention mastectomy for the high-risk patients. In our study, we have compared the efficacy of subcutaneous mastectomy (SCM) and skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) in long-term follow up. Methods: We have included 201 female patients who have been treated at our department over the course of 20 years between 2000 and 2019. All the patients were at high risk of developing breast cancer and therefore were indicated for the prophylactic mastectomy. The main indication was the presence of the mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 cluster, however, even in the lack of such mutation, the family history was sufficient for the mastectomy indication. Patients underwent either SCM, SSM or areola sparing mastectomy (ASM), and were allocated to aforementioned groups, respectively. We have collected the data regarding the reconstruction method along with age, weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and presence of predisposing genetic mutations such as BRCA positivity. Results: The patients who underwent SSM compared to those who underwent SCM were of higher age, with higher BMI and body mass. The patients in SSM group had statistically significantly higher BMI than in ASM. There was no difference in efficacy between patients who underwent SSM and SCM. The majority of patients (91.5%) were positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. In our study, only four patients were tested negative for known breast cancer inducing mutation (three in SCM and one in SSM). The most common reconstruction method was an abdominal flap and breast implant. Conclusions: Prophylactic mastectomy is a reliable strategy for significantly reducing the number of breast cancer incidence in high-risk patients regardless of the selected method of mastectomy. These operations allow for the subsequent reconstruction with the whole spectrum of reconstructive options.
BACKGROUND: Mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes increase the lifetime risk of developing breast cancer to 68-72% by the age of 80. One of the modalities to manage the risk is a prophylactic mastectomy. Bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy specifically offers the most favorable esthetic outcomes but the evidence for its oncological safety remains limited. Thus, we aimed to compare the occurrence of breast cancer between nipple-sparing mastectomy and surveillance groups of BRCA1 or BRCA 2 mutations carriers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BRCA1 or BRCA2-positive patients undergoing bilateral prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy at our department were identified. Only those unaffected by breast cancer were eligible. Each patient was pair-matched with a BRCA1 or BRCA2-positive patient of equal age from the surveillance group. Breast cancer incidence in both groups was recorded and the results were compared. RESULTS: None of 105 patients who underwent NSM between 2009 and 2019 at a single institution with a mean follow-up time of 50 months developed breast cancer over this time period. One patient in this group died of an unrelated cause. Nine patients from 105 in the match-paired surveillance group were diagnosed with breast cancer during a mean follow-up time of 58.3 months, however, none of them died. CONCLUSION: To the best of our knowledge, this is the largest single-center study of risk-reducing bilateral NSM in healthy BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. Based on our results and those of other series, we conclude that NSM in its current form appears to be at least equally as safe as other types of mastectomy for preventing breast cancer in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
In patients with large breasts undergoing a subcutaneous mastectomy with immediate implant-based reconstruction, is necessary to perform a mastopexy. The combination of these procedures increases the complication rate. To reduce it, it is necessary to cover the lower pole of the implant. Our study aimed to compare the use of an autologous dermal flap and an absorbable breast mesh. A total of 64 patients without previous breast surgery were divided into 2 groups, each with 32 patients. In the 1st group, the implant was covered with an autologous caudally based dermal flap, sutured to the great pectoral muscle. In the 2nd group, the implant was covered with a fully absorbable breast mesh, fixed caudally in the inframammary fold and cranially to the great pectoral muscle. The incidence of complications, the aesthetic effect, and patient satisfaction were evaluated in a one-year follow-up. In the 1st group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 partial nipple-areola complex necrosis, 4 cases of dehiscence in the T-suture, and the malposition of the implant in 2 patients. In the 2nd group, there were 2 cases of seroma, 2 cases of T-junction dehiscence, and 1 case of full nipple-areola complex necrosis, which resulted in implant loss. There was no significant difference in patient satisfaction between the study groups. The dermal flap is more suitable for breasts with pronounced ptosis. The use of the synthetic mesh is suitable for smaller breasts, where the possible dermal flap would be too small to cover the implant. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV: This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
- MeSH
- chirurgické síťky MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mamoplastika * škodlivé účinky metody MeSH
- mastektomie metody MeSH
- nádory prsu * chirurgie MeSH
- nekróza chirurgie MeSH
- prsní bradavky chirurgie MeSH
- retrospektivní studie MeSH
- serom chirurgie MeSH
- subkutánní mastektomie * metody MeSH
- výsledek terapie MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- MeSH
- axila chirurgie MeSH
- biopsie sentinelové lymfatické uzliny metody normy MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- lymfadenektomie metody normy MeSH
- mamoplastika etika kontraindikace metody MeSH
- mastektomie metody MeSH
- nádory prsu * chirurgie patologie MeSH
- radikální mastektomie metody MeSH
- segmentální mastektomie kontraindikace metody MeSH
- subkutánní mastektomie metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- MeSH
- finanční podpora výzkumu jako téma MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mastektomie metody využití MeSH
- nádory prsu chirurgie MeSH
- plastická chirurgie metody využití MeSH
- subkutánní mastektomie metody využití MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- přehledy MeSH
- MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mamoplastika MeSH
- nádory prsu chirurgie terapie MeSH
- subkutánní mastektomie metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- subkutánní mastektomie metody MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
