The Nipple-Areola Preserving Mastectomy: A Multistage Procedure Aiming to Improve Reconstructive Outcomes following Mastectomy

Carlos A Martinez, Scott M Reis, Erika A Sato, Sean G Boutros, Carlos A Martinez, Scott M Reis, Erika A Sato, Sean G Boutros

Abstract

Ischemia of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) and periareolar tissue is commonly seen following tissue-preserving mastectomies for small invasive and noninvasive cancers. The nipple-areola preserving mastectomy is a multistage procedure in which the NAC and central mastectomy flap tissue is surgically delayed to improve the survivability in patients undergoing mastectomies followed by reconstruction.

Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of 20 patients undergoing the 2-stage nipple-areola preserving mastectomy: the first stage comprised undermining the NAC and raising the breast skin flaps, with placement of a silicone sheet in the dissected pocket. The second stage followed 2-3 weeks after the NAC delay, with patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomies.

Results: Mean age was 46.2 years (range, 23-59 years). Indications included breast cancer in 18 patients and BRCA gene mutation prophylaxis in 2 patients. None were actively smoking. Mean time between delay of flaps and breast reconstructions was 16 days (range, 10-35 days). One patient underwent bilateral nipple resection at the time of mastectomies due to a subareolar nipple biopsy positive for ductal carcinoma in situ. One patient underwent left nipple excision after a skin nipple biopsy was positive for metaplasia. No signs of NAC vascular compromise were observed in any of the cases.

Conclusions: Our 2-stage approach benefits patients undergoing nipple-sparing mastectomy, especially those at high-risk, by safely increasing survivability of the native breast skin envelope and NAC, while improving oncologic outcomes by identification of subareolar malignancies and sentinel node status before mastectomy and reconstruction.

Conflict of interest statement

Disclosure: The authors have no financial interest to declare in relation to the content of this article. The Article Processing Charge was paid for by the authors.

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Postoperative view of the patient 5 days following bilateral delay of the flaps.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Both breasts revealed no signs of vascular compromise during inspection.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Postoperative results 8 months after bilateral reconstruction with the DIEP flap.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
No complications developed postoperatively, achieving total satisfaction.
Fig. 5.
Fig. 5.
Appearance of the breasts after 6 days following bilateral flap delay.
Fig. 6.
Fig. 6.
The NAC in both breasts without any signs of necrosis.
Fig. 7.
Fig. 7.
Photographs taken after 6 months. The patient underwent bilateral reconstruction with the DIEP flap.
Fig. 8.
Fig. 8.
Her postoperative course was uneventful, with both flaps healing nicely.

References

    1. Heneghan HM, Prichard RS, Lyons R, et al. Quality of life after immediate breast reconstruction and skin-sparing mastectomy - a comparison with patients undergoing breast conserving surgery. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:937–943.
    1. Petit JY, Rietjens M, Garusi C, et al. Integration of plastic surgery in the course of breast-conserving surgery for cancer to improve cosmetic results and radicality of tumor excision. Recent Results Cancer Res. 1998;152:202–211.
    1. Umberto Veronesi, Vaia Stafyla, Jean-Yves Petit, et al. Conservative mastectomy: extending the idea of breast conservation. Lancet Oncol. 2012;13:e311–e317.
    1. Nahabedian MY, Tsangaris TN. Breast reconstruction following subcutaneous mastectomy for cancer: a critical appraisal of the nipple-areola complex. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117:1083–1090.
    1. Palmieri B, Baitchev G, Grappolini S, et al. Delayed nipple-sparing modified subcutaneous mastectomy: rationale and technique. Breast J. 2005;11:173–178.
    1. Jensen JA, Orringer JS, Giuliano AE. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in 99 patients with a mean follow-up of 5 years. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:1665–1670.
    1. Algaithy ZK, Petit JY, Lohsiriwat V, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: can we predict the factors predisposing to necrosis? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38:125–129.
    1. Garwood ER, Moore D, Ewing C, et al. Total skin-sparing mastectomy: complications and local recurrence rates in 2 cohorts of patients. Ann Surg. 2009;249:26–32.
    1. Nava MB, Ottolenghi J, Pennati A, et al. Skin/nipple sparing mastectomies and implant-based breast reconstruction in patients with large and ptotic breast: oncological and reconstructive results. Breast. 2012;21:267–271.
    1. Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, et al. The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg. 2009;249:461–468.
    1. Rusby JE, Smith BL, Gui GP. Nipple-sparing mastectomy. Br J Surg. 2010;97:305–316.
    1. Shestak KC, Gabriel A, Landecker A, et al. Assessment of long-term nipple projection: a comparison of three techniques. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;110:780–786.
    1. Wagner JL, Fearmonti R, Hunt KK, et al. Prospective evaluation of the nipple-areola complex sparing mastectomy for risk reduction and for early-stage breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:1137–1144.
    1. Crowe JP, Patrick RJ, Yetman RJ, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy update: one hundred forty-nine procedures and clinical outcomes. Arch Surg. 2008;143:1106–1110.
    1. Caruso F, Ferrara M, Castiglione G, et al. Nipple sparing subcutaneous mastectomy: sixty-six months follow-up. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:937–940.
    1. Sacchini V, Pinotti JA, Barros AC, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk reduction: oncologic or technical problem? J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203:704–714.
    1. Petit JY, Veronesi U, Rey P, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: risk of nipple-areolar recurrences in a series of 579 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;114:97–101.
    1. Komorowski AL, Zanini V, Regolo L, et al. Necrotic complications after nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy. World J Surg. 2006;30:1410–1413.
    1. Chang DW, Reece GP, Wang B, et al. Effect of smoking on complications in patients undergoing free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:2374–2380.
    1. Regolo L, Ballardini B, Gallarotti E, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: an innovative skin incision for an alternative approach. Breast. 2008;17:8–11.
    1. Jensen JA, Lin JH, Kapoor N, et al. Surgical delay of the nipple-areolar complex: a powerful technique to maximize nipple viability following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3171–3176.
    1. Restifo RJ, Thomson JG. The preconditioned TRAM flap: preliminary clinical experience. Ann Plast Surg. 1998;41:343–347.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren