Use of autologous fat grafting for reconstruction postmastectomy and breast conserving surgery: a systematic review protocol

Riaz A Agha, Tim Goodacre, Dennis P Orgill, Riaz A Agha, Tim Goodacre, Dennis P Orgill

Abstract

Introduction: There is growing interest in the potential use of autologous fat grafting (AFG) for the purposes of breast reconstruction. However, concerns have been raised regarding the technique's clinical effectiveness, safety and interference with screening mammography. The objective of this systematic review was to determine the oncological, clinical, aesthetic and functional, patient reported, process and radiological outcomes for AFG.

Methods and analysis: All original studies, including randomised controlled trials, cohorts studies, case-control studies, case series and case reports involving women undergoing breast reconstruction. All AFG techniques performed for the purposes of reconstruction in the postmastectomy or breast conserving surgery setting will be considered. Outcomes are defined within this protocol along; oncological, clinical, aesthetic and functional, patient reported, process and radiological domains. The search strategy has been devised to find papers about 'fat grafting and breast reconstruction' and is outlined within the body of this protocol. The full search strategy is outlined within the body of the protocol. The following electronic databases will be searched from 1 January 1986 to 6 June 2013: PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, CINAHL, PsycINFO, SciELO, The Cochrane Library, including the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effect (DARE), the Cochrane Methodology Register, Health Technology Assessment Database, the NHS Economic Evaluation Databases and Cochrane Groups, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials Database, the World Health Organisation (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, UpToDate.com, NHS Evidence and the York Centre for Reviews and Dissemination. Grey literature searches will also be conducted as detailed in our review protocol. Eligibility assessment occurred in two stages, title and abstract screening and then full text assessment. Data were extracted and stored in a database with standardised extraction fields to facilitate easy and consistent data entry.

Ethics and dissemination: This systematic review will be published in a peer-reviewed journal. It will also be presented at national and international conferences in the fields of plastic, reconstructive and aesthetic surgery and at more general surgical and methodological conferences. It will be disseminated electronically and in print. Brief reports of the review findings will be disseminated directly to the appropriate audiences of surgeons and societies through email and other modes of communication. Updates of the review will be conducted to inform and guide healthcare practice and policy.

Protocol registration: PROSPERO-National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (CRD42013005254).

Keywords: PLASTIC & RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Number of articles published per year and indexed by SCOPUS under the search term “fat grafting”.

References

    1. Cancer Research UK Breast cancer incidence statistics [Internet]. Cancer Research UK; 2013. [cited 24 Jun 2013].
    1. NHS Information Centre National Mastectomy and Breast Reconstruction Audit, Fourth Annual Report—2011—Datasets—DGU. 2011
    1. Institute NC. 2013. Breast Cancer Treatment (PDQ®)—National Cancer Institute [Internet] [cited 6 Sep 2013]. .
    1. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Saccozzi R, et al. Conservative treatment of breast cancer. A trial in progress at the Cancer Institute of Milan. Cancer 1977;39(6 Suppl):2822–6
    1. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2002;347:1227–32
    1. Veronesi U, Salvadori B, Luini A, et al. Breast conservation is a safe method in patients with small cancer of the breast. Long-term results of three randomised trials on 1,973 patients. Eur J Cancer 1995;31A:1574–9
    1. LENT SOMA scales for all anatomic sites Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1995;31:1049–91
    1. Mioton LM, Smetona JT, Hanwright PJ, et al. Comparing thirty-day outcomes in prosthetic and autologous breast reconstruction: a multivariate analysis of 13,082 patients? J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013;66:917–25
    1. Lymperopoulos NS, Sofos S, Constantinides J, et al. Blood loss and transfusion rates in DIEP flap breast reconstruction. Introducing a new predictor. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2013.
    1. Choices N. Breast implants—complications—NHS choices. Department of Health
    1. Avelar R. Allergan experience post approval studies. 2005.
    1. Reaby LL. Reasons why women who have mastectomy decide to have or not to have breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;101:1810–18
    1. Department of Health. 2012. Poly Implant Prothèse (PIP) silicone breast implants: review of the actions of the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) and Department of Health.
    1. Tanne JH. FDA warns about metal-on-metal hip replacements. BMJ 2013;346:f429.
    1. Coleman SR. Structural fat grafting: more than a permanent filler. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118(3 Suppl):108S–20S
    1. Rigotti G, Marchi A, Galiè M, et al. Clinical treatment of radiotherapy tissue damage by lipoaspirate transplant: a healing process mediated by adipose-derived adult stem cells. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;119:1409–22; discussion 1423–4
    1. Ersek RA, Chang P, Salisbury MA. Lipo layering of autologous fat: an improved technique with promising results. Plast Reconstr Surg 1998;101:820–6
    1. Hinderer UT, del Rio JL. Erich Lexer's mammaplasty. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1992;16:101–7
    1. Peer L. Loss of weight and volume in human fat grafts: with postulation of a “cell survival theory.” Plast Reconstr Surg 1950;5:217–30
    1. Illouz YG. Body contouring by lipolysis: a 5-year experience with over 3000 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 1983;72:591–7
    1. Bircoll M. Cosmetic breast augmentation utilizing autologous fat and liposuction techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 1987;79:267–71
    1. Maillard GF. Liponecrotic cysts after augmentation mammaplasty with fat injections. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1994;18:405–6
    1. Gutowski KA. Current applications and safety of autologous fat grafts: a report of the ASPS fat graft task force. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124:272–80
    1. Khouri R, Del Vecchio D. Breast reconstruction and augmentation using pre-expansion and autologous fat transplantation. Clin Plast Surg 2009;36:269–80, viii
    1. ASPRS Ad-Hoc Committee on New Procedures Report on autologous fat transplantation. Plast Surg Nurs 1987;7:140–1
    1. Coleman SR. Long-term survival of fat transplants: controlled demonstrations. Aesthetic Plast Surg 1995;19:421–5
    1. Coleman S. Structural fat grafting. St. Louis: Quality Medical Publishing, 2004
    1. Nguyen A, Pasyk KA, Bouvier TN, et al. Comparative study of survival of autologous adipose tissue taken and transplanted by different techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg 1990;85:378–86; discussion 387–9
    1. Illouz YG, Sterodimas A. Autologous fat transplantation to the breast: a personal technique with 25 years of experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2009;33:706–15
    1. Delay E, Garson S, Tousson G, et al. Fat injection to the breast: technique, results, and indications based on 880 procedures over 10 years. Aesthet Surg J 2009;29:360–76
    1. Spear SL, Wilson HB, Lockwood MD. Fat injection to correct contour deformities in the reconstructed breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 2005;116:1300–5
    1. Gimble JM, Floyd ZE. Fat circadian biology. J Appl Physiol 2009;107:1629–37
    1. Lin L, Fu X, Zhang X, et al. Rat adipose-derived stromal cells expressing BMP4 induce ectopic bone formation in vitro and in vivo. Acta Pharmacol Sin 2006;27:1608–15
    1. Yoshimura K, Sato K, Aoi N, et al. Cell-assisted lipotransfer for cosmetic breast augmentation: supportive use of adipose-derived stem/stromal cells. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008;32:48–55; discussion 56–7
    1. Moseley TA, Zhu M, Hedrick MH. Adipose-derived stem and progenitor cells as fillers in plastic and reconstructive surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118(3 Suppl):121S–8S
    1. Lu F, Li J, Gao J, et al. Improvement of the survival of human autologous fat transplantation by using VEGF-transfected adipose-derived stem cells. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009;124:1437–46
    1. Houghton J, Stoicov C, Nomura S, et al. Gastric cancer originating from bone marrow-derived cells. Science 2004;306:1568–71
    1. Wang WZ, Fang X-H, Williams SJ, et al. Analysis for apoptosis and necrosis on adipocytes, stromal vascular fraction, and adipose-derived stem cells in human lipoaspirates after liposuction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013;131:77e–85e
    1. Pearl RA, Leedham SJ, Pacifico MD. The safety of autologous fat transfer in breast cancer: lessons from stem cell biology. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2012;65:283–8
    1. Direkze NC, Jeffery R, Hodivala-Dilke K, et al. Bone marrow-derived stromal cells express lineage-related messenger RNA species. Cancer Res 2006;66:1265–9
    1. Wang Y-Y, Lehuédé C, Laurent V, et al. Adipose tissue and breast epithelial cells: a dangerous dynamic duo in breast cancer. Cancer Lett 2012;324:142–51
    1. Bertolini F. Contribution of endothelial precursors of adipose tissue to breast cancer: progression-link with fat graft for reconstructive surgery. Ann Endocrinol (Paris) 2013;74:106–7
    1. Wang C-F, Zhou Z, Yan Y-J, et al. Clinical analyses of clustered microcalcifications after autologous fat injection for breast augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011;127:1669–73
    1. Shea BJ, Hamel C, Wells GA, et al. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2009;62:1013–20
    1. Shea BJ, Grimshaw JM, Wells GA, et al. Development of AMSTAR: a measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med Res Methodol 2007;7:10.
    1. Shea BJ, Bouter LM, Peterson J, et al. External validation of a measurement tool to assess systematic reviews (AMSTAR). PLoS ONE 2007;2:e1350.
    1. Leopardi D, Thavaneswaran P, Mutimer KLA, et al. Autologous fat transfer for breast augmentation: a systematic review. ANZ J Surg 2013.
    1. Claro FJ, Figueiredo JCA, Zampar AG, et al. Applicability and safety of autologous fat for reconstruction of the breast. Br J Surg 2012;99:768–80
    1. Rosing JH, Wong G, Wong MS, et al. Autologous fat grafting for primary breast augmentation: a systematic review. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2011;35:882–90
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S. eds. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0 [updated March 2011] [Internet]. The Cochrane Collaboration 2011. (cited 20 Jun 2013).
    1. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. Int J Surg 2010;8:336–41
    1. Agha R, Goodacre T, Orgill D. Autologous fat grafting for breast reconstruction: a systematic review [Internet]. 2013 [cited 1 Aug 2013]. .
    1. OCEBM Levels of Evidence Working Group The Oxford 2011 levels of evidence [Internet]. Oxford: Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine, 2011:5653
    1. Clavien PA, Barkun J, De Oliveira ML, et al. The Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications: five-year experience. Ann Surg 2009;250:187–96
    1. Netscher DT, Sharma S, Thornby J, et al. Aesthetic outcome of breast implant removal in 85 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 1997;100:206–19
    1. Cano SJ, Klassen AF, Scott AM, et al. A closer look at the BREAST-Q(©). Clin Plast Surg 2013;40:287–96
    1. Google. Inside Google Translate—Google Translate [Internet].
    1. Balk EM, Chung M, Chen ML, et al. Assessing the accuracy of Google Translate to allow data extraction from trials published in non-English languages 2013. —PubMed—NCBI. 2013
    1. Coleman SR. In: Thorne CH. ed. Grabb & Smith's plastic surgery. 6th edn Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer, 2007:480–5
    1. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401–6
    1. Higgins JPT, Green S. ed. 12.2.1 The GRADE approach [Internet]. Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.1.0. 2011 [cited 24 Jun 2013].
    1. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan) Version 5.2. 2012

Source: PubMed

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

3
Subscribe