Impact of Surgical Techniques, Biomaterials, and Patient Variables on Rate of Nipple Necrosis after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy
- 1 September 2013
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health) in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
- Vol. 132 (3), 330e-338e
- https://doi.org/10.1097/prs.0b013e31829ace49
Abstract
Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy is appropriate for selected patients with early-stage breast cancer or high breast cancer risk. However, the postoperative rate of nipple necrosis is relatively high (10 to 30 percent). This study analyzed the impact of clinicopathologic and surgical variables on partial and total nipple necrosis rates after nipple-sparing mastectomy and compared overall complication rates between nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy. Methods: The study included 233 cases; 113 had nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction and 120 were matched cases of skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction performed at the authors’ institution from September of 2003 through May of 2011. Results: The overall complication rate was 28 percent for nipple-sparing mastectomy and 27 percent for skin-sparing mastectomy (p > 0.99). In patients who did not have axillary surgery (those undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy), the overall rate was significantly higher in the nipple-sparing group (26 percent versus 9 percent; p = 0.06). However, in patients who had axillary surgery (either sentinel lymph node biopsy or axillary lymphadenectomy), the rate did not differ between the two groups. For nipple-sparing mastectomy, the overall incidence of any (partial or total) nipple necrosis was 20 percent. Only two cases (2 percent) had total necrosis. Larger breasts (C cup or larger) were associated with a higher rate of nipple necrosis (p = 0.003). Conclusions: The authors found no significant difference in the overall incidence of complications in patients who had nipple-sparing mastectomy or skin-sparing mastectomy. Exclusion of axillary lymphatic surgery in nipple-sparing mastectomy patients did not decrease the incidence of complications. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.This publication has 19 references indexed in Scilit:
- Risk of Locoregional Recurrence in Patients With False-Negative Frozen Section or Close Margins of Retroareolar Specimen in Nipple-Sparing MastectomyAnnals of Surgical Oncology, 2012
- Oncologic Safety of Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Discussion and Review of the LiteratureInternational Journal of Surgical Oncology, 2012
- Nipple-Sparing MastectomyAnnals of Plastic Surgery, 2012
- Extended Indications for Nipple-Sparing MastectomyThe Breast Journal, 2011
- Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: A Review of Indications, Techniques and SafetyPlastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 2010
- Nipple-sparing mastectomyBritish Journal of Surgery, 2010
- The Oncological Safety of Skin Sparing Mastectomy with Conservation of the Nipple-Areola Complex and Autologous Reconstruction: An Extended Follow-Up StudyAnnals of Surgery, 2009
- Nipple sparing mastectomy with nipple areola intraoperative radiotherapy: one thousand and one cases of a five years experience at the European institute of oncology of Milan (EIO)Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 2009
- Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer and Risk Reduction: Oncologic or Technical Problem?Journal of the American College of Surgeons, 2006
- Neoplastic involvement of nipple-areolar complex in invasive breast cancerThe American Journal of Surgery, 1989