Reoperation and Postoperative Outcomes for Single-Stage versus Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction Following Mastectomy: A Meta-Analysis

Introduction Implant based breast reconstructions has become widely accepted as an appropriate reconstruction method following mastectomy for breast cancer. The two most common techniques include immediate reconstruction and implantation (single-stage procedure) or the use of a tissue expander with delayed insertion of implant and reconstruction (two-stage procedure). Using existing studies and available data, a meta-analysis was performed analyzing reoperation rates and postoperative complications between these two methods based upon available literature. Methods A literature search was performed by two individual investigators using the databases PubMed, Cochrane, and Medline. All articles comparing implant based single and two stage breast reconstructions outcomes between 2006 and 2016 were utilized. The primary endpoint of interest was reoperation rates. Secondary endpoints included postoperative complications such as infection, seroma, hematoma, and necrosis. Results A total of five studies met the inclusion criteria, for a total of 12,357 breast reconstructions. 2,281 breast reconstructions were singlestage and 10,076 were two-staged. The primary endpoint of reoperation was increased reoperation rate in the single-stage breast reconstruction (OR=0.78, CI 0.67-0.91; p<0.05). Secondary endpoints demonstrated no statistical significance in infections (OR 1.06, CI 0.84-1.34; p=0.40), hematoma (OR=1.66, CI 0.91-3.05; p=0.09) and necrosis (OR=1.13, CI 0.76-1.68; p=0.29). However, there was an increased incidence of seroma formation in two-stage reconstruction (OR=1.86, CI 1.05-3.28; p<0.005). Conclusions Single and two-staged implant breast reconstructions had similar infection, hematoma, and necrosis rates. Single-stage reconstructions resulted in a significant increase in reoperation/revision rates.