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
Controlled Clinical Trial
. 2023 Jan 9;43(1):40-48.
doi: 10.1093/asj/sjac125.

Donor Site Satisfaction Following Autologous Fat Transfer for Total Breast Reconstruction

Jamilla L M Wederfoort  1 , Esther van Santbrink  2 , Juliette E Hommes  1 , Esther M Heuts  3 , Sander M J Van Kuijk  4 , René R W J van der Hulst  1 , Andrzej Piatkowski  5 ; BREAST− trial investigators
Collaborators, Affiliations
Controlled Clinical Trial

Donor Site Satisfaction Following Autologous Fat Transfer for Total Breast Reconstruction

Jamilla L M Wederfoort et al. Aesthet Surg J. .

Abstract

Background: With evolving breast cancer survival and patient preferences, it is essential that reconstructive surgeons worldwide continue searching for the best reconstruction technique for patients. Autologous fat transfer (AFT) is a relatively new technique for total breast reconstruction that has already proven to be effective and safe with all advantages of autologous tissue. However, little is known about the aesthetic results and satisfaction concerning donor sites.

Objectives: The aim of this study was to measure donor site satisfaction following AFT for total breast reconstruction in breast cancer patients.

Methods: Between May and August of 2021, participants of the BREAST- trial who were at least 24 months after their final reconstruction surgery were invited to complete an additional survey concerning donor sites. The BODY-Q was utilized for data collection. Results of AFT patients were compared with a control group of implant-based reconstruction patients who did not have a donor site.

Results: A total of 51 patients (20 control, 31 intervention) completed the questionnaire. Satisfaction with body did not statistically differ between the groups. The most frequent complaint was contour irregularities (31 reports, 60.8%), with the least favorable donor site being thighs (23 reports, 53.5%) in the AFT group.

Conclusions: Satisfaction with body did not differ between breast cancer patients receiving AFT or implant-based reconstruction, meaning that large-volume liposuction does not aesthetically affect the utilized donor sites. Nevertheless, reconstructive surgeons should be aware of possible donor site complications, especially contour irregularities at the thighs, and discuss this with their patients.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Flow chart shows how final study size was obtained.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Chart showing number of complaints per donor site region per group, with pink indicating autologous fat transfer and blue indicating implant-based reconstruction.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
This chart shows different types of donor site complaints and amount of mentions per treatment group, with pink indicating autologous fat transfer and blue indicating implant-based reconstruction.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Comment in

References

    1. Merie R, Shafiq J, Soon PS, Delaney GP. Surgical and radiotherapy patterns of care in the management of breast cancer in NSW and ACT Australia. J Med Imaging Radiat Oncol. 2022;66(3):442–454. doi: 10.1111/1754-9485.13357 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Joslyn SA. Patterns of care for immediate and early delayed breast reconstruction following mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2005;115(5):1289–1296. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000156974.69184.5e - DOI - PubMed
    1. Shay P, Jacobs J. Autologous reconstruction following nipple sparing mastectomy: a comprehensive review of the current literature. Gland Surg. 2018;7(3):316–324. doi: 10.21037/gs.2018.05.03 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Mureau MAM. Dutch breast reconstruction guideline. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2018;71(3):290–304. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2017.12.020 - DOI - PubMed
    1. National Breast Cancer Consultation Netherlands (NABON). Dutch breast cancer guideline. Accessed May 9, 2022.https://richtlijnendatabase.nl/richtlijn/borstreconstructie/reconstructi....

Publication types