Autologous vs. implant-based breast reconstruction after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy—A deeper insight considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes
Maxi von Glinski, Nikla Holler, Sherko Kümmel, Mattea Reinisch, Christoph Wallner, Johannes Maximilian Wagner, Mehran Dadras, Alexander Sogorski, Marcus Lehnhardt, Björn Behr
Abstract
Introduction Autologous (ABR) and implant-based breast reconstruction (IBR) represent the most common procedures after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy. This cross-sectional study is a comprehensive analysis of ABR and IBR considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes. Patients and methods Eligible patients underwent breast reconstruction (ABR and IBR) after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy between January 2014 and December 2020. Outcome parameters included quality of life (European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer - EORTC - QLQ30, BR23, Breast-Q, CES-D), complication rates, aesthetic result, and breast sensitivity. Results 108 patients participated in the study (IBR: n = 72, age 48.9 ± 9.9 years; ABR: n = 36, age: 46.6 ± 7.3 years). Mean follow-up was 27.1 ± 9.3 (IBR) and 34.9 ± 20.5 (ABR), respectively. IBR patients suffered significantly more often from major complications (30.6% vs. 8.3%; p = 0.01), while ABR patients underwent secondary procedures significantly more often to improve the aesthetic result (55.6% vs. 29.2%, p = 0.004). Unilateral reconstructions revealed superior aesthetic results in ABR (n.s.), while in bilateral reconstruction IBR tended to score higher (n.s.). Scar evaluation resulted in a better result of IBR in both categories ( p < 0.01). Breast sensitivity was severely impaired in both groups. The Breast-Q revealed a significantly higher “patient satisfaction with breast” after ABR ( p = 0.033), while the other QoL-tests and subscales showed no significant differences between the two procedures. Conclusion ABR is associated with a higher patient satisfaction despite the high probability of secondary procedures to improve the aesthetic outcome, whereas IBR-patients suffer more often from major complications. Furthermore, the laterality of reconstruction should be included in the individual decision-making process.