Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: A systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis

Matthew Endara, Duan Chen, Kapil Verma, Maurice Y. Nahabedian, Scott L. Spear

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

BACKGROUND:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is a controversial option for breast cancer treatment due to locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. In addition to these oncologic factors, technical factors such as ideal incision type or reconstructive options are also debatable. This systematic review examines current trends with nipple-sparing mastectomy, including selection criteria, locoregional and distant metastasis rates, incision choice, and reconstructive options. METHODS:: Systematic electronic searches were performed in the PubMed and Ovid databases using search terms for studies reporting outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy and all forms of reconstruction. Studies between 1970 and 2013 were reviewed. Pooled descriptive statistics with separate analyses for incision type and reconstructive method were performed. RESULTS:: Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 6615 nipple-sparing mastectomies for analysis. The overall pooled complication rate was 22 percent, the nipple necrosis rate was 7 percent, the locoregional recurrence rate was 1.8 percent, and the distant metastasis rate was 2.2 percent. Comparing combined patient cohorts for two-stage expander to implant, one-stage direct to implant, and autologous reconstruction demonstrated overall complication rates of 52.8, 16.7, and 23.7 percent and nipple necrosis rates of 4.5, 4.1, and 17.3 percent, respectively. Incision types were divided into five categories: radial, periareolar/circumareolar, inframammary, mastopexy, and transareolar, with nipple necrosis rates of 8.83, 17.81, 9.09, 4.76, and 81.82 percent, respectively CONCLUSIONS:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy appears to be an oncologically safe option for properly selected patients, with low rates of locoregional and distant metastasis. Overall complication and nipple necrosis rates are affected by incision location and reconstruction method. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine best incision and reconstructive methods.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1043-1054
Number of pages12
JournalPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery
Volume132
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 2013
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Nipples
Mammaplasty
Mastectomy
Necrosis
Neoplasm Metastasis
Recurrence
PubMed
Patient Selection
Randomized Controlled Trials
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Databases
Breast Neoplasms

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Medicine(all)

Cite this

Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy : A systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis. / Endara, Matthew; Chen, Duan; Verma, Kapil; Nahabedian, Maurice Y.; Spear, Scott L.

In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Vol. 132, No. 5, 11.2013, p. 1043-1054.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Endara, Matthew ; Chen, Duan ; Verma, Kapil ; Nahabedian, Maurice Y. ; Spear, Scott L. / Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy : A systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis. In: Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. 2013 ; Vol. 132, No. 5. pp. 1043-1054.
@article{b34d739c51784b57abf3d429bcda3d5d,
title = "Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: A systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis",
abstract = "BACKGROUND:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is a controversial option for breast cancer treatment due to locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. In addition to these oncologic factors, technical factors such as ideal incision type or reconstructive options are also debatable. This systematic review examines current trends with nipple-sparing mastectomy, including selection criteria, locoregional and distant metastasis rates, incision choice, and reconstructive options. METHODS:: Systematic electronic searches were performed in the PubMed and Ovid databases using search terms for studies reporting outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy and all forms of reconstruction. Studies between 1970 and 2013 were reviewed. Pooled descriptive statistics with separate analyses for incision type and reconstructive method were performed. RESULTS:: Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 6615 nipple-sparing mastectomies for analysis. The overall pooled complication rate was 22 percent, the nipple necrosis rate was 7 percent, the locoregional recurrence rate was 1.8 percent, and the distant metastasis rate was 2.2 percent. Comparing combined patient cohorts for two-stage expander to implant, one-stage direct to implant, and autologous reconstruction demonstrated overall complication rates of 52.8, 16.7, and 23.7 percent and nipple necrosis rates of 4.5, 4.1, and 17.3 percent, respectively. Incision types were divided into five categories: radial, periareolar/circumareolar, inframammary, mastopexy, and transareolar, with nipple necrosis rates of 8.83, 17.81, 9.09, 4.76, and 81.82 percent, respectively CONCLUSIONS:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy appears to be an oncologically safe option for properly selected patients, with low rates of locoregional and distant metastasis. Overall complication and nipple necrosis rates are affected by incision location and reconstruction method. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine best incision and reconstructive methods.",
author = "Matthew Endara and Duan Chen and Kapil Verma and Nahabedian, {Maurice Y.} and Spear, {Scott L.}",
year = "2013",
month = "11",
doi = "10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a48b8a",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "132",
pages = "1043--1054",
journal = "Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery",
issn = "0032-1052",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "5",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy

T2 - A systematic review of the literature with pooled analysis

AU - Endara, Matthew

AU - Chen, Duan

AU - Verma, Kapil

AU - Nahabedian, Maurice Y.

AU - Spear, Scott L.

PY - 2013/11

Y1 - 2013/11

N2 - BACKGROUND:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is a controversial option for breast cancer treatment due to locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. In addition to these oncologic factors, technical factors such as ideal incision type or reconstructive options are also debatable. This systematic review examines current trends with nipple-sparing mastectomy, including selection criteria, locoregional and distant metastasis rates, incision choice, and reconstructive options. METHODS:: Systematic electronic searches were performed in the PubMed and Ovid databases using search terms for studies reporting outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy and all forms of reconstruction. Studies between 1970 and 2013 were reviewed. Pooled descriptive statistics with separate analyses for incision type and reconstructive method were performed. RESULTS:: Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 6615 nipple-sparing mastectomies for analysis. The overall pooled complication rate was 22 percent, the nipple necrosis rate was 7 percent, the locoregional recurrence rate was 1.8 percent, and the distant metastasis rate was 2.2 percent. Comparing combined patient cohorts for two-stage expander to implant, one-stage direct to implant, and autologous reconstruction demonstrated overall complication rates of 52.8, 16.7, and 23.7 percent and nipple necrosis rates of 4.5, 4.1, and 17.3 percent, respectively. Incision types were divided into five categories: radial, periareolar/circumareolar, inframammary, mastopexy, and transareolar, with nipple necrosis rates of 8.83, 17.81, 9.09, 4.76, and 81.82 percent, respectively CONCLUSIONS:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy appears to be an oncologically safe option for properly selected patients, with low rates of locoregional and distant metastasis. Overall complication and nipple necrosis rates are affected by incision location and reconstruction method. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine best incision and reconstructive methods.

AB - BACKGROUND:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is a controversial option for breast cancer treatment due to locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. In addition to these oncologic factors, technical factors such as ideal incision type or reconstructive options are also debatable. This systematic review examines current trends with nipple-sparing mastectomy, including selection criteria, locoregional and distant metastasis rates, incision choice, and reconstructive options. METHODS:: Systematic electronic searches were performed in the PubMed and Ovid databases using search terms for studies reporting outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy and all forms of reconstruction. Studies between 1970 and 2013 were reviewed. Pooled descriptive statistics with separate analyses for incision type and reconstructive method were performed. RESULTS:: Forty-eight studies met inclusion criteria, yielding 6615 nipple-sparing mastectomies for analysis. The overall pooled complication rate was 22 percent, the nipple necrosis rate was 7 percent, the locoregional recurrence rate was 1.8 percent, and the distant metastasis rate was 2.2 percent. Comparing combined patient cohorts for two-stage expander to implant, one-stage direct to implant, and autologous reconstruction demonstrated overall complication rates of 52.8, 16.7, and 23.7 percent and nipple necrosis rates of 4.5, 4.1, and 17.3 percent, respectively. Incision types were divided into five categories: radial, periareolar/circumareolar, inframammary, mastopexy, and transareolar, with nipple necrosis rates of 8.83, 17.81, 9.09, 4.76, and 81.82 percent, respectively CONCLUSIONS:: Nipple-sparing mastectomy appears to be an oncologically safe option for properly selected patients, with low rates of locoregional and distant metastasis. Overall complication and nipple necrosis rates are affected by incision location and reconstruction method. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to determine best incision and reconstructive methods.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887317873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887317873&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a48b8a

DO - 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182a48b8a

M3 - Article

C2 - 23924650

AN - SCOPUS:84887317873

VL - 132

SP - 1043

EP - 1054

JO - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

JF - Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

SN - 0032-1052

IS - 5

ER -