Comparative Outcomes of Proton versus Photon Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy in Pre-Pectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.

IF 3.2 2区 医学 Q1 SURGERY
Anshumi Desai, Carolina Padilla, Seraphina Choi, Sunwoo Han, Danielle Cerbon, Devinder P Singh, John C Oeltjen, Cristiane Takita, Isildinha M Reis, Juan Rodolfo Mella-Catinchi
{"title":"Comparative Outcomes of Proton versus Photon Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy in Pre-Pectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.","authors":"Anshumi Desai, Carolina Padilla, Seraphina Choi, Sunwoo Han, Danielle Cerbon, Devinder P Singh, John C Oeltjen, Cristiane Takita, Isildinha M Reis, Juan Rodolfo Mella-Catinchi","doi":"10.1097/PRS.0000000000012232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The rising popularity of pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PP-IBBR) and proton radiation lacks outcomes data. We aim to compare complications in PP-IBBR with photon (XRT) versus proton (PRT) post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-institution retrospective cohort study included breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and PP-IBBR with PMRT (January 2020-October 2022) with two-year follow-up after surgery. We assessed for minor infection (requiring oral antibiotics), major infections (requiring intravenous antibiotics), wound complications, flap necrosis, seromas, re-operations, capsular contracture, and implant failures (requiring implant removal for any of the aforementioned complications, except for rupture) including implant exposure.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>116 PP-IBBR receiving PMRT were analyzed dividing into two cohorts: Photon (XRT) (n=75, 64.7%) and Proton (PRT) (n=41, 35.3%). Overall, XRT showed more complications compared to PRT. Major infection, minor infection, delayed wound healing, partial flap necrosis, seroma development, re-operations, implant failure, and capsular contracture of all grades as well as grade 3 and 4 capsular contracture were seen more in XRT compared to PRT. Compared to PRT, XRT was significantly associated with higher risk of ≥2 complications in univariable analysis (OR: 3.71, 95% CI: 1.02-13.53, p=0.047) and in the multivariable model adjusting for the stage (OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 1.27-18.46, p=0.021). Compared to stages 1-2, stages 3-4 were significantly associated with higher risk of ≥2 complications (OR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.21-9.57, p=0.021) adjusting for radiation type.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Compared to traditional XRT, PRT had fewer complications in patients with PP-IBBR. PRT is a safer option, warranting larger studies and broader utilization in clinical practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":20128,"journal":{"name":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Plastic and reconstructive surgery","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000012232","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The rising popularity of pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PP-IBBR) and proton radiation lacks outcomes data. We aim to compare complications in PP-IBBR with photon (XRT) versus proton (PRT) post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT).

Methods: A single-institution retrospective cohort study included breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and PP-IBBR with PMRT (January 2020-October 2022) with two-year follow-up after surgery. We assessed for minor infection (requiring oral antibiotics), major infections (requiring intravenous antibiotics), wound complications, flap necrosis, seromas, re-operations, capsular contracture, and implant failures (requiring implant removal for any of the aforementioned complications, except for rupture) including implant exposure.

Results: 116 PP-IBBR receiving PMRT were analyzed dividing into two cohorts: Photon (XRT) (n=75, 64.7%) and Proton (PRT) (n=41, 35.3%). Overall, XRT showed more complications compared to PRT. Major infection, minor infection, delayed wound healing, partial flap necrosis, seroma development, re-operations, implant failure, and capsular contracture of all grades as well as grade 3 and 4 capsular contracture were seen more in XRT compared to PRT. Compared to PRT, XRT was significantly associated with higher risk of ≥2 complications in univariable analysis (OR: 3.71, 95% CI: 1.02-13.53, p=0.047) and in the multivariable model adjusting for the stage (OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 1.27-18.46, p=0.021). Compared to stages 1-2, stages 3-4 were significantly associated with higher risk of ≥2 complications (OR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.21-9.57, p=0.021) adjusting for radiation type.

Conclusion: Compared to traditional XRT, PRT had fewer complications in patients with PP-IBBR. PRT is a safer option, warranting larger studies and broader utilization in clinical practice.

乳房切除术后质子与光子放射治疗在胸前植体乳房重建中的比较结果。
引言:胸前植体乳房重建术(PP-IBBR)和质子放射术越来越受欢迎,但缺乏疗效数据。我们的目的是比较光子(XRT)与质子(PRT)乳房切除术后放射治疗(PMRT)的PP-IBBR并发症。方法:一项单机构回顾性队列研究纳入了接受乳房切除术和PP-IBBR合并PMRT的乳腺癌患者(2020年1月- 2022年10月),术后随访两年。我们评估了轻微感染(需要口服抗生素)、严重感染(需要静脉注射抗生素)、伤口并发症、皮瓣坏死、血清肿、再手术、包膜挛缩和种植体失败(除破裂外,任何上述并发症都需要移除种植体),包括种植体暴露。结果:116例接受PMRT治疗的PP-IBBR患者分为两组:Photon (XRT)组(n=75, 64.7%)和Proton (PRT)组(n=41, 35.3%)。总的来说,与PRT相比,XRT显示出更多的并发症。严重感染、轻微感染、伤口愈合延迟、部分皮瓣坏死、血清肿发展、再手术、种植体失败、所有级别的包膜挛缩以及3级和4级包膜挛缩在XRT中比PRT更常见。与PRT相比,在单变量分析中(OR: 3.71, 95% CI: 1.02-13.53, p=0.047)和在调整分期的多变量模型中(OR: 4.84, 95% CI: 1.27-18.46, p=0.021), XRT与≥2个并发症的高风险显著相关。与1-2期相比,根据放疗类型调整后,3-4期患者≥2个并发症的风险较高(OR: 3.40, 95% CI: 1.21-9.57, p=0.021)。结论:与传统的XRT相比,PRT治疗PP-IBBR患者的并发症较少。PRT是一种更安全的选择,需要更大规模的研究和在临床实践中更广泛的应用。
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
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
13.90%
发文量
1436
审稿时长
1.5 months
期刊介绍: For more than 70 years Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® has been the one consistently excellent reference for every specialist who uses plastic surgery techniques or works in conjunction with a plastic surgeon. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® , the official journal of the American Society of Plastic Surgeons, is a benefit of Society membership, and is also available on a subscription basis. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery® brings subscribers up-to-the-minute reports on the latest techniques and follow-up for all areas of plastic and reconstructive surgery, including breast reconstruction, experimental studies, maxillofacial reconstruction, hand and microsurgery, burn repair, cosmetic surgery, as well as news on medicolegal issues. The cosmetic section provides expanded coverage on new procedures and techniques and offers more cosmetic-specific content than any other journal. All subscribers enjoy full access to the Journal''s website, which features broadcast quality videos of reconstructive and cosmetic procedures, podcasts, comprehensive article archives dating to 1946, and additional benefits offered by the newly-redesigned website.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信