To Stage or Not to Stage? Direct-to-Implant Versus Staged Reconstruction for Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction

C. Siotos, Kelly A. Harmon, Nikki Rezania, Deana S Shenaq
{"title":"To Stage or Not to Stage? Direct-to-Implant Versus Staged Reconstruction for Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction","authors":"C. Siotos, Kelly A. Harmon, Nikki Rezania, Deana S Shenaq","doi":"10.1093/asjof/ojae007.080","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Goals/Purpose Implant-based breast reconstruction remains the common method of reconstruction after mastectomy in the US. An increasing number of centers are now offering direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction, avoiding staged reconstructions with tissue expander placement first. However, little is known regarding the need for revisions following DTI. In this study we sought to investigate short- and long-term complications and revisions following DTI versus staged reconstruction. Methods/Technique We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent bilateral nipple-sparing-mastectomies seeking implant-based breast reconstruction between September 2016 to September 2021. We extracted demographic and clinical information for the selected patients. Patients were divided in two cohorts: the DTI cohort, and the staged cohort. Baseline differences among the two groups were assessed by performing non-parametric statistical tests. Number of complications and revisions were assessed by employing chi-square. Logistic regression was then employed to adjust for possible confounders. Results/Complications During the study period, we identified 143 patients, 69 in the DTI cohort and 74 in the staged cohort. Patients in the staged cohort were more likely to have higher BMI (mean 26 kg/m2 versus 24.3 kg/m2 in the DTI cohort) and have undergone prior radiotherapy than those in the DTI cohort. No differences based on age, race/ethnicity or comorbidities were present. According to our analysis and within the follow up period time of average 21 months, the two cohorts had similar rates of minor and major short- and long-term surgical complications. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, the DTI group had a significantly higher rate of overall revisions (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.23-6.07, p-value 0.01) and specifically revisions with implant exchange (0R 3.06, 95% CI 1.06-8.85, p-value 0.03). Most common reason for reason was asymmetry or contour deformity. However, the DTI cohort had significantly lower charges associated with their care during the follow up period (d=-100,178.14 US dollars, p-value=0.001). Complications rates were similar among the two groups. Conclusion An increasing number of patients are now interested in DTI breast reconstruction. According to the results of our study, DTI patients may have increased number of revisions but share similar rates of complications. DTI breast reconstruction is also associated with lower charges, even after accounting for the additional necessary revision procedures. Careful selection of patients for DTI and appropriate education on the need for revisions in the future is paramount.","PeriodicalId":72118,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum","volume":"1 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic surgery journal. Open forum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asjof/ojae007.080","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract Goals/Purpose Implant-based breast reconstruction remains the common method of reconstruction after mastectomy in the US. An increasing number of centers are now offering direct-to-implant (DTI) breast reconstruction, avoiding staged reconstructions with tissue expander placement first. However, little is known regarding the need for revisions following DTI. In this study we sought to investigate short- and long-term complications and revisions following DTI versus staged reconstruction. Methods/Technique We retrospectively reviewed all patients who underwent bilateral nipple-sparing-mastectomies seeking implant-based breast reconstruction between September 2016 to September 2021. We extracted demographic and clinical information for the selected patients. Patients were divided in two cohorts: the DTI cohort, and the staged cohort. Baseline differences among the two groups were assessed by performing non-parametric statistical tests. Number of complications and revisions were assessed by employing chi-square. Logistic regression was then employed to adjust for possible confounders. Results/Complications During the study period, we identified 143 patients, 69 in the DTI cohort and 74 in the staged cohort. Patients in the staged cohort were more likely to have higher BMI (mean 26 kg/m2 versus 24.3 kg/m2 in the DTI cohort) and have undergone prior radiotherapy than those in the DTI cohort. No differences based on age, race/ethnicity or comorbidities were present. According to our analysis and within the follow up period time of average 21 months, the two cohorts had similar rates of minor and major short- and long-term surgical complications. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, the DTI group had a significantly higher rate of overall revisions (OR 2.73, 95% CI 1.23-6.07, p-value 0.01) and specifically revisions with implant exchange (0R 3.06, 95% CI 1.06-8.85, p-value 0.03). Most common reason for reason was asymmetry or contour deformity. However, the DTI cohort had significantly lower charges associated with their care during the follow up period (d=-100,178.14 US dollars, p-value=0.001). Complications rates were similar among the two groups. Conclusion An increasing number of patients are now interested in DTI breast reconstruction. According to the results of our study, DTI patients may have increased number of revisions but share similar rates of complications. DTI breast reconstruction is also associated with lower charges, even after accounting for the additional necessary revision procedures. Careful selection of patients for DTI and appropriate education on the need for revisions in the future is paramount.
分期还是不分期?基于植入物的乳房重建中的 "直接植入 "与 "分期重建 "之争
摘要 目标/目的 植入式乳房重建仍是美国乳房切除术后重建的常用方法。现在,越来越多的中心开始提供直接植入(DTI)乳房再造,避免了先放置组织扩张器再进行分期再造的做法。然而,人们对 DTI 后是否需要翻修知之甚少。在这项研究中,我们试图调查 DTI 重建与分期重建后的短期和长期并发症及翻修情况。方法/技术 我们回顾性研究了 2016 年 9 月至 2021 年 9 月间所有接受双侧乳头保留切除术并寻求植入物乳房重建的患者。我们提取了入选患者的人口统计学和临床信息。患者被分为两组:DTI组和分期组。两组患者的基线差异通过非参数统计检验进行评估。并发症和翻修次数采用卡方进行评估。然后采用逻辑回归调整可能的混杂因素。结果/并发症 在研究期间,我们共发现了143名患者,其中69人属于DTI队列,74人属于分期队列。与 DTI 队列的患者相比,分期队列的患者更有可能具有较高的体重指数(平均为 26 kg/m2,而 DTI 队列为 24.3 kg/m2),并且之前接受过放疗。在年龄、种族/民族或合并症方面不存在差异。根据我们的分析,在平均 21 个月的随访期内,两组患者的短期和长期轻微和严重手术并发症发生率相似。在调整了潜在的混杂因素后,DTI 组的总体翻修率(OR 2.73,95% CI 1.23-6.07,P 值 0.01)明显高于 DTI 组,特别是更换植入物的翻修率(0R 3.06,95% CI 1.06-8.85,P 值 0.03)。最常见的原因是不对称或轮廓畸形。不过,DTI队列在随访期间的相关费用明显较低(d=-100,178.14 美元,p值=0.001)。两组患者的并发症发生率相似。结论 现在越来越多的患者对 DTI 乳房重建感兴趣。根据我们的研究结果,DTI 患者的翻修次数可能会增加,但并发症发生率相似。即使考虑到额外的必要翻修手术,DTI 乳房重建的收费也较低。谨慎选择患者进行 DTI 重建,并对其进行适当的教育,使其了解将来需要进行翻修是至关重要的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
4 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信