Download PDF
J Reconstr Microsurg 2021; 37(09): 720-727
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1726031
Original Article

Breast Reconstruction Completion in the Obese: Does Reconstruction Technique Make a Difference in Its Achievement?

Christine Velazquez
1   Department of General Surgery, Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
,
Robert C. Siska
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
,
Ivo A. Pestana 
2   Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
› Author Affiliations
› Further Information
    Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Background Breast mound and nipple creation are the goals of the reconstructive process. Unlike in normal body mass index (BMI) women, breast reconstruction in the obese is associated with increased risk of perioperative complications. Our aim was to determine if reconstruction technique and the incidence of perioperative complications affect the achievement of reconstruction completion in the obese female.

Methods Consecutive obese women (BMI ≥30) who underwent mastectomy and implant or autologous reconstruction were evaluated for the completion of breast reconstruction.

Results Two hundred twenty-five women with 352 reconstructions were included. Seventy-four women underwent 111 autologous reconstructions and 151 women underwent 241 implant-based reconstructions. Chemotherapy, radiation, and delayed reconstruction timing was more common in the autologous patients. Major perioperative complications (requiring hospital readmission or unplanned surgery) occurred more frequently in the implant group (p ≤ 0.0001). Breast mounds were completed in >98% of autologous cases compared with 76% of implant cases (p ≤ 0.001). Nipple areolar complex (NAC) creation was completed in 57% of autologous patients and 33% of implant patients (p = 0.0009). The rate of successfully completing the breast mound and the NAC was higher in the autologous patient group (Mound odds ratio or OR 3.32, 95% confidence interval or CI 1.36–5.28 and NAC OR 2.7, 95% CI 1.50–4.69).

Conclusion Occurrence of a major complication in the implant group decreased the rate of reconstruction completion. Obese women who undergo autologous breast reconstruction are more likely to achieve breast reconstruction completion when compared with obese women who undergo implant-based breast reconstruction.

Keywords

breast reconstruction - obese - completion


Publication History

Received: 05 June 2020

Accepted: 02 January 2021

Article published online:
31 March 2021

© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.

Thieme Medical Publishers, Inc.
333 Seventh Avenue, 18th Floor, New York, NY 10001, USA

 

  • References

  • 1 Sisco M, Johnson DB, Wang C, Rasinski K, Rundell VL, Yao KA. The quality-of-life benefits of breast reconstruction do not diminish with age. J Surg Oncol 2015; 111 (06) 663-668
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Ng SK, Hare RM, Kuang RJ, Smith KM, Brown BJ, Hunter-Smith DJ. Breast reconstruction post mastectomy patient satisfaction and decision making. Ann Plast Surg 2016; 76 (06) 640-644
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Kim MK, Kim T, Moon HG. et al. Effect of cosmetic outcome on quality of life after breast cancer surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol 2015; 41 (03) 426-432
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Rowland JH, Desmond KA, Meyerowitz BE, Belin TR, Wyatt GE, Ganz PA. Role of breast reconstructive surgery in physical and emotional outcomes among breast cancer survivors. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92 (17) 1422-1429
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Cho EH, Shammas RL, Glener AD, Greenup RA, Hwang ES, Hollenbeck ST. The impact of autologous breast reconstruction on body mass index patterns in breast cancer patients: a propensity-matched analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 140 (06) 1121-1131
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Shaikh-Naidu N, Preminger BA, Rogers K, Messina P, Gayle LB. Determinants of aesthetic satisfaction following TRAM and implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2004; 52 (05) 465-470 , discussion 470
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 World Health Organization. Obesity and overweight. 2018 . Accessed October 25, 2020 at: https://www.who.int/en/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/obesity-and-overweight
    Google Scholar
  • 8 Alderman AK, Wilkins EG, Kim HM, Lowery JC. Complications in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: two-year results of the Michigan Breast Reconstruction Outcome Study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2002; 109 (07) 2265-2274
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Wilkins EG, Hamill JB, Kim HM. et al. Complications in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: one-year outcomes of the Mastectomy Reconstruction Outcomes Consortium (MROC) Study. Ann Surg 2018; 267 (01) 164-170
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Fischer JP, Nelson JA, Sieber B. et al. Free tissue transfer in the obese patient: an outcome and cost analysis in 1258 consecutive abdominally based reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131 (05) 681e-692e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 McCarthy CM, Mehrara BJ, Riedel E. et al. Predicting complications following expander/implant breast reconstruction: an outcomes analysis based on preoperative clinical risk. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (06) 1886-1892
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Panayi AC, Agha RA, Sieber BA, Orgill DP. Impact of obesity on outcomes in breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Reconstr Microsurg 2018; 34 (05) 363-375
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Kaufman CS. National quality validation programs for breast centers. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 2007; 7 (10) 1357-1362
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Zhong T, Hu J, Bagher S. et al. A Comparison of psychological response, body image, sexuality, and quality of life between immediate and delayed autologous tissue breast reconstruction: a prospective long-term outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2016; 138 (04) 772-780
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Srinivasa DR, Clemens MW, Qi J. et al. Obesity and breast reconstruction: complications and patient-reported outcomes in a multicenter, prospective study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 145 (03) 481e-490e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Al-Ghazal SK, Sully L, Fallowfield L, Blamey RW. The psychological impact of immediate rather than delayed breast reconstruction. Eur J Surg Oncol 2000; 26 (01) 17-19
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 17 Ban KA, Minei JP, Laronga C. et al. American College of Surgeons and Surgical Infection Society: surgical site infection guidelines, 2016 update. J Am Coll Surg 2017; 224 (01) 59-74
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 18 Burns DJP, Rapetto F, Angelini GD. et al. Body mass index and early outcomes following mitral valve surgery for degenerative disease. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 2020; (e-pub ahead of print) DOI: 10.1016/j.jtcvs.2019.10.193.
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Meller MM, Toossi N, Johanson NA, Gonzalez MH, Son MS, Lau EC. Risk and cost of 90-day complications in morbidly and superobese patients after total knee arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty 2016; 31 (10) 2091-2098
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 20 Rudolph M, Moore C, Pestana IA. Operative risk stratification in the obese female undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction. Breast J 2019; 25 (06) 1182-1186
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 21 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 (03) 396-404
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 22 Fischer JP, Nelson JA, Serletti JM, Wu LC. Peri-operative risk factors associated with early tissue expander (TE) loss following immediate breast reconstruction (IBR): a review of 9305 patients from the 2005-2010 ACS-NSQIP datasets. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013; 66 (11) 1504-1512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 23 Hanwright PJ, Davila AA, Hirsch EM. et al. The differential effect of BMI on prosthetic versus autogenous breast reconstruction: a multivariate analysis of 12,986 patients. Breast 2013; 22 (05) 938-945
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 24 DelMauro MA, Moon VA. Obesity and the abdominal wall vasculature: correlating BMI with perforator anatomy. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020; 36 (06) 438-444
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 25 Lam G, Weichman KE, Reavey PL. et al. Analysis of flap weight and postoperative complications based on flap weight in patients undergoing microsurgical breast reconstruction. J Reconstr Microsurg 2017; 33 (03) 186-193
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 26 Garland M, Hsu FC, Clark C, Chiba A, Howard-McNatt M. The impact of obesity on outcomes for patients undergoing mastectomy using the ACS-NSQIP data set. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2018; 168 (03) 723-726
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 27 Sultan SM, Seth AK, Lamelas AM, Greenspun DT, Erhard HA. Bipedicle-conjoined deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps for unilateral breast reconstruction in overweight and obese patients: do the benefits outweigh the risks?. J Reconstr Microsurg 2020; 36 (05) 346-352
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 28 Klement KA, Hijjawi JB, LoGiudice JA, Alghoul M, Omesiete-Adejare P. Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the obese: a better option than tissue expander/implant reconstruction?. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144 (03) 539-546
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 29 Basta MN, Gerety PA, Serletti JM, Kovach SJ, Fischer JP. A systematic review and head-to-head meta-analysis of outcomes following direct-to-implant versus conventional two-stage implant reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2015; 136 (06) 1135-1144
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 30 Frey JD, Choi M, Salibian AA, Karp NS. Comparison of outcomes with tissue expander, immediate implant, and autologous breast reconstruction in greater than 1000 nipple-sparing mastectomies. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139 (06) 1300-1310
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 31 Nelson JA, Voineskos SH, Qi J. et al. Elective revisions after breast reconstruction: results from the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium. Plast Reconstr Surg 2019; 144 (06) 1280-1290
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 32 Yoon AP, Qi J, Brown DL. et al. Outcomes of immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction: results of a multicenter prospective study. Breast 2018; 37: 72-79
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 33 Archambeau JO, Pezner R, Wasserman T. Pathophysiology of irradiated skin and breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995; 31 (05) 1171-1185
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 34 Lanier ST, Wang ED, Chen JJ. et al. The effect of acellular dermal matrix use on complication rates in tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2010; 64 (05) 674-678
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 35 Kraenzlin FS, Saunders H, Aliu O. et al. Classification of breast tissue expander infections: back to the basics. J Surg Oncol 2019; 120 (02) 142-147
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Nguyen KT, Hanwright PJ, Smetona JT, Hirsch EM, Seth AK, Kim JY. Body mass index as a continuous predictor of outcomes after expander-implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg 2014; 73 (01) 19-24
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Yueh JH, Slavin SA, Adesiyun T. et al. Patient satisfaction in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: a comparative evaluation of DIEP, TRAM, latissimus flap, and implant techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125 (06) 1585-1595
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Sarwer DB, Polonsky HM. Body image and body contouring procedures. Aesthet Surg J 2016; 36 (09) 1039-1047
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Liu T, Freijs C, Klein HJ. et al. Patients with abdominal-based free flap breast reconstruction a decade after surgery: a comprehensive long-term follow-up study. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2018; 71 (09) 1301-1309
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Chang DW, Wang B, Robb GL. et al. Effect of obesity on flap and donor-site complications in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2000; 105 (05) 1640-1648
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Vyas RM, Dickinson BP, Fastekjian JH, Watson JP, DaLio AL, Crisera CA. Risk factors for abdominal donor-site morbidity in free flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2008; 121 (05) 1519-1526
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Boczar D, Huayllani MT, Forte AJ, Rinker B. Microsurgical breast reconstruction in the obese patient using abdominal flaps: complication profile and patient satisfaction. Ann Plast Surg 2020; 84 (6S): (Suppl. 05) S361-S363
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar