Important Considerations for Performing Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction.

Hani Sbitany
Author Information
  1. Hani Sbitany: San Francisco, Calif.

Abstract

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has emerged as an excellent technique for postmastectomy reconstruction, as it allows for full preservation of a patient's pectoralis major muscle and chest wall function. This reduces pain, eliminates animation deformity, and results in high patient satisfaction. Safely performed prepectoral breast reconstruction requires a careful patient selection process before committing to the procedure, taking into account comorbidities, radiation status, and oncologic criteria such as tumor location and breast cancer stage. Furthermore, a thorough intraoperative assessment of mastectomy skin flaps is critical, with careful and precise confirmation that the skin is viable and well perfused, prior to proceeding with prepectoral breast reconstruction. This can be done both clinically and with perfusion assessment devices. The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has enhanced outcomes and aesthetics of prepectoral reconstruction, by providing implant coverage and soft-tissue support. The ADM also adds the benefit of reducing capsular contracture rates and offers full control over the aesthetic definition of the newly reconstructed breast pocket. Aesthetic enhancement of results requires routine use of oversizing implants in the skin envelope, careful selection of full capacity or cohesive gel implants, and autologous fat grafting. In this way, patients in all clinical scenarios can benefit from the full muscle-sparing technique of prepectoral breast reconstruction, including those undergoing immediate reconstruction, delayed reconstruction, and delayed conversion from a subpectoral to prepectoral plane to correct animation deformity.

References

  1. Sbitany H, Piper M, Lentz R. Prepectoral breast reconstruction: a safe alternative to submuscular prosthetic reconstruction following nipple sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:432443.
  2. Salibian AH, Harness JK, Mowlds DS. Staged suprapectoral expander/implant reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139:3039.
  3. Becker H, Lind JG 2nd, Hopkins EG. Immediate implant-based prepectoral breast reconstruction using a vertical incision. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3:e412.
  4. Sigalove S, Maxwell GP, Sigalove NM, et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: rationale, indications, and preliminary results. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;139:287294.
  5. Vidya R, Iqbal FM. A guide to prepectoral breast reconstruction: a new dimension to implant-based breast reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer. 2017;17:266271.
  6. Spear SL, Boehmler JH, Bogue DP, et al. Options in reconstructing the irradiated breast. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:379388.
  7. Buchanan CL, Dorn PL, Fey J, et al. Locoregional recurrence after mastectomy: incidence and outcomes. J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:469474.
  8. Robertson SA, Rusby JE, Cutress RI. Determinants of optimal mastectomy skin flap thickness. Br J Surg. 2014;101:899911.
  9. Sbitany H, Wang F, Peled AW, et al. Tissue expander reconstruction after total skin-sparing mastectomy: defining the effects of coverage technique on nipple/areola preservation. Ann Plast Surg. 2016;77:1724.
  10. Phillips BT, Lanier ST, Conkling N, et al. Intraoperative perfusion techniques can accurately predict mastectomy skin flap necrosis in breast reconstruction: results of a prospective trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:778e788e.
  11. Mattison GL, Lewis PG, Gupta SC, et al. SPY imaging use in postmastectomy breast reconstruction patients: preventative or overly conservative? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2016;138:15e21e.
  12. Nahabedian MY. AlloDerm performance in the setting of prosthetic breast surgery, infection, and irradiation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:17211722.
  13. Snyderman RK, Guthrie RH. Reconstruction of the female breast following radical mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1971;47:565567.
  14. Basu CB, Leong M, Hicks MJ. Acellular cadaveric dermis decreases the inflammatory response in capsule formation in reconstructive breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126:18421847.
  15. Sbitany H, Serletti JM. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction: a systematic and critical review of efficacy and associated morbidity. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:11621169.
  16. Sbitany H, Sandeen SN, Amalfi AN, et al. Acellular dermis-assisted prosthetic breast reconstruction versus complete submuscular coverage: a head-to-head comparison of outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124:17351740.
  17. Colwell AS, Damjanovic B, Zahedi B, et al. Retrospective review of 331 consecutive immediate single-stage implant reconstructions with acellular dermal matrix: indications, complications, trends, and costs. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:11701178.
  18. Sbitany H, Wang F, Peled AW, et al. Immediate implant-based breast reconstruction following total skin-sparing mastectomy: defining the risk of preoperative and postoperative radiation therapy for surgical outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;134:396404.
  19. Woo A, Harless C, Jacobson SR. Revisiting an old place: single-surgeon experience on post-mastectomy subcutaneous implant-based breast reconstruction. Breast J. 2017;23:545553.
  20. Kobraei EM, Cauley R, Gadd M, et al. Avoiding breast animation deformity with pectoralis-sparing subcutaneous direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e708.
  21. Becker H, Fregosi N. The impact of animation deformity on quality of life in post-mastectomy reconstruction patients. Aesthet Surg J. 2017;37:531536.
  22. Cordeiro PG, McGuire P, Murphy DK. Natrelle 410 extra-full projection silicone breast implants: 2-year results from two prospective studies. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;136:638646.
  23. Spear SL, Coles CN, Leung BK, et al. The safety, effectiveness, and efficiency of autologous fat grafting in breast surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2016;4:e827.
  24. Hammond DC, Schmitt WP, O’Connor EA. Treatment of breast animation deformity in implant-based reconstruction with pocket change to the subcutaneous position. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135:15401544.
  25. Hulvat MC, Hansen NM, Jeruss JS. Multidisciplinary care for patients with breast cancer. Surg Clin North Am. 2009;89:133176, ix.

MeSH Term

Breast Neoplasms
Female
Humans
Intraoperative Care
Mammaplasty
Mastectomy
Patient Care Team
Patient Selection
Surgery, Plastic
Surgical Flaps

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0reconstructionbreastprepectoralfullcarefulskinPrepectoraltechniqueanimationdeformityresultspatientrequiresselectionassessmentcanuseADMbenefitimplantsdelayedemergedexcellentpostmastectomyallowspreservationpatient'spectoralismajormusclechestwallfunctionreducespaineliminateshighsatisfactionSafelyperformedprocesscommittingproceduretakingaccountcomorbiditiesradiationstatusoncologiccriteriatumorlocationcancerstageFurthermorethoroughintraoperativemastectomyflapscriticalpreciseconfirmationviablewellperfusedpriorproceedingdoneclinicallyperfusiondevicesacellulardermalmatrixenhancedoutcomesaestheticsprovidingimplantcoveragesoft-tissuesupportalsoaddsreducingcapsularcontractureratesofferscontrolaestheticdefinitionnewlyreconstructedpocketAestheticenhancementroutineoversizingenvelopecapacitycohesivegelautologousfatgraftingwaypatientsclinicalscenariosmuscle-sparingincludingundergoingimmediateconversionsubpectoralplanecorrectImportantConsiderationsPerformingBreastReconstruction

Similar Articles

Cited By