Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2019 Jan;143(1):10-20.
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000005140.

Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy: An Assessment of Clinical Outcomes and Benefits

Hani Sbitany  1 , Clara Gomez-Sanchez  1 , Merisa Piper  1 , Rachel Lentz  1
Affiliations

Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy: An Assessment of Clinical Outcomes and Benefits

Hani Sbitany et al. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2019 Jan.

Abstract

Background: Prepectoral breast reconstruction following mastectomy has become a more widely performed technique in recent years because of its numerous benefits for women. These include full pectoralis muscle preservation, reduced loss of strength, reduced pain, and elimination of animation deformity. As with any breast reconstruction technique, widespread adoption is dependent on a low morbidity profile in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy, as this adjuvant therapy is routine in breast cancer treatment. The authors assess the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy following prepectoral breast reconstruction, and compare these to outcomes of patients undergoing postmastectomy radiation therapy with submuscular reconstruction.

Methods: A single surgeon's experience with immediate prepectoral breast reconstruction, followed by postmastectomy radiation therapy, from 2015 to 2017 was reviewed. Patient demographics and incidence of complications during the tissue expander stage were assessed. In addition, the morbidity profile of these patients was compared to that of patients undergoing submuscular/dual-plane reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy over the same period.

Results: Over 3 years, 175 breasts underwent immediate prepectoral reconstruction, and 236 breasts underwent immediate submuscular/dual-plane reconstruction. Overall rates of adjuvant radiation therapy (postmastectomy radiation therapy) were similar between prepectoral [26 breasts (14.9 percent)] and submuscular [31 breasts (13.1 percent)] (p = 0.6180) reconstruction. There were no significant differences in complication rates between the two reconstructive cohorts, in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy, including rates of explantation (15.4 percent versus 19.3 percent; p = 0.695).

Conclusions: Prepectoral breast reconstruction is a safe and effective option in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy. The morbidity profile is similar to that encountered with submuscular reconstruction in this setting.

Clinical question/level of evidence: Therapeutic, III.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Fisher CS, Martin-Dunlap T, Ruppel MB, Gao F, Atkins J, Margenthaler JA. Fear of recurrence and perceived survival benefit are primary motivators for choosing mastectomy over breast-conservation therapy regardless of age. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:32463250.
    1. Chagpar AB. Prophylactic bilateral mastectomy and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2014;23:423430.
    1. Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh AO, et al. Trends and variation in use of breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:919926.
    1. Sbitany H, Amalfi AN, Langstein HN. Preferences in choosing between breast reconstruction options: A survey of female plastic surgeons. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:17811789.
    1. Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ, et al. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction: Increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;131:1523.