Secondary Logo

Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Incisions for Cancer Extirpation Prospective Cohort Trial: Perfusion, Complications, and Patient Outcomes

Odom, Elizabeth B., M.D.; Parikh, Rajiv P., M.D., M.P.H.S.; Um, Grace, M.D.; Kantola, Simone W., M.D.; Cyr, Amy E., M.D.; Margenthaler, Julie A., M.D.; Tenenbaum, Marissa M., M.D.; Myckatyn, Terence M., M.D.

Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery: July 2018 - Volume 142 - Issue 1 - p 13–26
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004498
Breast: Original Articles
Outcomes: Quality of Care

Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy offers several advantages for women seeking postmastectomy breast reconstruction, but compromised skin and nipple perfusion may lead to skin and nipple necrosis. It is unclear whether the incisional approach contributes to these complications; therefore, the purpose of this study was to compare the impact of incision type on outcomes in patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Methods: This is a prospective cohort study of patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy with prosthetic breast reconstruction through an inframammary fold versus a lateral radial incision. Skin and nipple perfusion as represented by fluorescence intensity, mammometric parameters, patient-reported outcomes, and clinical outcomes were analyzed and compared for the two cohorts, and multivariable logistic regression models were performed to evaluate the effects of covariates on outcomes.

Results: Seventy-nine patients were studied: 55 in the inframammary fold cohort and 24 in the lateral radial cohort. The inframammary fold group had significantly less fluorescence intensity to the inferior (21.9 percent versus 36.9 percent; p = 0.001) and lateral portions of breast skin (23.1 percent versus 40.7 percent; p = 0.003) after reconstruction. Decreased fluorescence intensity was associated with smoking, decreased mean arterial pressure, and greater specimen weight. Postreconstruction breast volumes were increased over preoperative volumes in the inframammary fold group (38.3 percent) versus the lateral radial (31.2 percent) group; however, patients with a lateral radial incision had a greater increase in satisfaction with their breasts and psychosocial well-being.

Conclusions: There are significant differences in patient-reported outcomes and final breast volumes based on the incisional approach to nipple-sparing mastectomy. These data can be used to guide providers and counsel patients considering nipple-sparing mastectomy with prosthetic reconstruction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II.

Evidence-Based Outcomes Article.

St. Louis, Mo.

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and the Section of Endocrine and Oncological Surgery, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine.

Received for publication October 1, 2017; accepted February 1, 2018.

This trial is registered under the name “Study to Assess Perfusion and Patient Satisfaction in Nipple-Areola Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction (NASSM),” ClinicalTrials.gov identification number NCT01969448 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01969448).

Presented in part at Plastic Surgery The Meeting 2016, Annual Meeting of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, in Los Angeles, California, September 23 through 27, 2016.

Disclosure: Dr. Myckatyn is a consultant for Acelity and Allergan. Acelity initially provided Spy kits for perfusion assessment to Dr. Tenenbaum for this study. No other funds or resources were provided for this study. None of the other authors have relevant financial disclosures.

Supplemental digital content is available for this article. Direct URL citations appear in the text; simply type the URL address into any Web browser to access this content. Clickable links to the material are provided in the HTML text of this article on the Journal’s website (www.PRSJournal.com).

Terence M. Myckatyn, M.D., Washington University School of Medicine, 1020 North Mason, Suite 110, Saint Louis, Mo. 63141

©2018American Society of Plastic Surgeons