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
Review
. 2019 Feb;8(1):11-18.
doi: 10.21037/gs.2018.08.01.

Strategies and considerations in selecting between subpectoral and prepectoral breast reconstruction

Affiliations
Review

Strategies and considerations in selecting between subpectoral and prepectoral breast reconstruction

Ara A Salibian et al. Gland Surg. 2019 Feb.

Abstract

Implant-based breast reconstruction has evolved through advances in mastectomy and reconstruction techniques to offer excellent outcomes with both prepectoral and subpectoral implant placement. Proper patient selection and surgical technique are key for optimizing outcomes and minimizing complications regardless of implant location. Therefore, familiarity with the benefits and limitations of each technique is vital. Several patient characteristics, such as history of significant comorbidities, radiation or active smoking, portend higher risk of complications with prepectoral reconstruction, in which case subpectoral implant placement may be a safer option. Oncologic consideration such as location and size of tumors also play an important role in determining the appropriate technique. The most critical factor in the success of prepectoral reconstruction is the quality of mastectomy flaps. Thorough intraoperative evaluation of mastectomy flap perfusion and viability will determine whether immediate prepectoral reconstruction is possible or other alternatives such as subpectoral or delayed prepectoral techniques should be considered. Discussing these factors with patients preemptively as well as developing a coordinated plan with the patient and oncologic surgeon will maximize success in both subpectoral and prepectoral implant-based reconstruction.

Keywords: Breast reconstruction; acellular dermal matrix (ADM); breast implant; dual-plane; prepectoral.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

    1. American Society of Plastic Surgeons. 2017 Plastic Surgery Statistics Report. Available online: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/documents/News/Statistics/2017/plastic-su...
    1. Apfelberg DB, Laub DR, Maser MR, et al. Submuscular breast reconstruction--indications and techniques. Ann Plast Surg 1981;7:213-21. 10.1097/00000637-198109000-00006 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bailey CR, Ogbuagu O, Baltodano PA, et al. Quality-of-Life Outcomes Improve with Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017;140:219-26. 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003505 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benediktsson KP, Perbeck L. Survival in breast cancer after nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants: a prospective trial with 13 years median follow-up in 216 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2008;34:143-8. 10.1016/j.ejso.2007.06.010 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Breuing KH, Colwell AS. Inferolateral AlloDerm hammock for implant coverage in breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2007;59:250-5. 10.1097/SAP.0b013e31802f8426 - DOI - PubMed