Prophylactic Mastectomy: Postoperative Skin Flap Thickness Evaluated by MRT, Ultrasound and Clinical Examination

Rebecca Wiberg, Magnus N Andersson, Johan Svensson, Anna Rosén, Freja Koch, Annika Björkgren, Malin Sund, Rebecca Wiberg, Magnus N Andersson, Johan Svensson, Anna Rosén, Freja Koch, Annika Björkgren, Malin Sund

Abstract

Background: Women with an increased hereditary risk of breast cancer can undergo prophylactic mastectomy (PM), which provides a significant, but not total, risk reduction. There is an ongoing discussion about how much skin and subcutaneous tissue should be resected to perform an adequate PM while leaving viable skin flaps.

Methods: Forty-five women who had undergone PM were examined with magnetic resonance tomography (MRT), ultrasound (US) and clinical examination (CE) by a plastic surgeon and a general surgeon to estimate skin flap thickness.

Results: The estimated mean skin flap thickness after PM was 13.3 (± 9.6), 7.0 (± 3.3), 6.9 (± 2.8) and 7.4 (± 2.8) mm following MRT, US, and CE performed by a plastic surgeon and a general surgeon, respectively. The mean difference in estimated skin flap thickness was significant between MRT and the other measuring methods, while there was no significant difference between US and CE, nor between CE performed by the surgeons. The mean skin flap thickness was significantly affected by the age at PM. Following PM, necrosis was detected in 7/23 (30.4%) of the breasts in skin flaps ≤ 5 mm and in 5/46 (10.9%) of the breasts in skin flaps > 5 mm (OR 6.29; CI 1.20-32.94; p = 0.03).

Conclusion: The odds of getting postoperative necrosis was > 6 times higher in skin flaps ≤ 5 mm. Thus, if the degree of remaining glandular tissue is acceptably low, it is desirable to create skin flaps thicker than 5 mm to prevent wound healing problems after the PM procedure.

References

    1. Regionala cancercentrum. Nationellt vårdprogram bröstcancer 2018.
    1. Foulkes WD. Inherited susceptibility to common cancers. N Engl J Med. 2008;359(20):2143–2153. doi: 10.1056/NEJMra0802968.
    1. Antoniou A, Pharoah PD, Narod S, et al. Average risks of breast and ovarian cancer associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations detected in case series unselected for family history: a combined analysis of 22 studies. Am J Hum Genet. 2003;72(5):1117–1130. doi: 10.1086/375033.
    1. King MC, Marks JH, Mandell JB, New York Breast Cancer Study G Breast and ovarian cancer risks due to inherited mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2. Science. 2003;302(5645):643–646. doi: 10.1126/science.1088759.
    1. Hartmann LC, Sellers TA, Schaid DJ, et al. Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene mutation carriers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(21):1633–1637. doi: 10.1093/jnci/93.21.1633.
    1. Rebbeck TR, Friebel T, Lynch HT, et al. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy reduces breast cancer risk in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: the PROSE Study Group. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(6):1055–1062. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.04.188.
    1. Torresan RZ, dos Santos CC, Okamura H, Alvarenga M. Evaluation of residual glandular tissue after skin-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(12):1037–1044. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2005.11.027.
    1. Verheyden CN. Nipple-sparing total mastectomy of large breasts: the role of tissue expansion. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1998;101(6):1494–1500 (discussion 1492–1501).
    1. Jeevan R, Cromwell DA, Browne JP, et al. Findings of a national comparative audit of mastectomy and breast reconstruction surgery in England. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67(10):1333–1344. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.04.022.
    1. Kroll SS, Khoo A, Singletary SE, et al. Local recurrence risk after skin-sparing and conventional mastectomy: a 6-year follow-up. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1999;104(2):421–425. doi: 10.1097/00006534-199908000-00015.
    1. Kummerow KL, Du L, Penson DF, Shyr Y, Hooks MA. Nationwide trends in mastectomy for early-stage breast cancer. JAMA Surg. 2015;150(1):9–16. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2014.2895.
    1. Hawley ST, Jagsi R, Morrow M, et al. Social and clinical determinants of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. JAMA Surg. 2014;149(6):582–589. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2013.5689.
    1. Phillips BT, Lanier ST, Conkling N, et al. Intraoperative perfusion techniques can accurately predict mastectomy skin flap necrosis in breast reconstruction: results of a prospective trial. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129(5):778e–788e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31824a2ae8.
    1. Arver B, Isaksson K, Atterhem H, et al. Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in Swedish women at high risk of breast cancer: a national survey. Ann Surg. 2011;253(6):1147–1154. doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318214b55a.
    1. Robertson SA, Rusby JE, Cutress RI. Determinants of optimal mastectomy skin flap thickness. Br J Surg. 2014;101(8):899–911. doi: 10.1002/bjs.9470.
    1. Beer GM, Varga Z, Budi S, Seifert B, Meyer VE. Incidence of the superficial fascia and its relevance in skin-sparing mastectomy. Cancer. 2002;94(6):1619–1625. doi: 10.1002/cncr.10429.
    1. Larson DL, Basir Z, Bruce T. Is oncologic safety compatible with a predictably viable mastectomy skin flap? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(1):27–33. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181f9589a.
    1. Griepsma M, de Roy van Zuidewijn DB, Grond AJ, Siesling S, Groen H, de Bock GH. Residual breast tissue after mastectomy: how often and where is it located? Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(4):1260–1266. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3383-x.
    1. Tewari M, Kumar K, Kumar M, Shukla HS. Residual breast tissue in the skin flaps after Patey mastectomy. Indian J Med Res. 2004;119(5):195–197.
    1. Cao D, Tsangaris TN, Kouprina N, et al. The superficial margin of the skin-sparing mastectomy for breast carcinoma: factors predicting involvement and efficacy of additional margin sampling. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(5):1330–1340. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9795-8.

Source: PubMed

스폰서 및 공동 작업자

건강 상태

약물 개입

3
구독하다