Predictors of complications after direct‐to‐implant breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix from a multicentre randomized clinical trial.
Published: 16th April 2018
Authors: V. L. Negenborn, R. E. G. Dikmans, M. B. Bouman, H. A. H. Winters, J. W. R. Twisk, P. Q. Ruhé et al.
In the multicentre randomized trial BRIOS (Breast Reconstruction In One Stage), direct‐to‐implant (DTI) breast reconstruction with an acellular dermal matrix (ADM) was associated with a markedly higher postoperative complication rate compared with two‐stage tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. This study aimed to identify factors that contribute to the occurrence of complications after DTI ADM‐assisted breast reconstruction.
Data were obtained from the BRIOS study, including all patients treated with DTI ADM‐assisted breast reconstruction. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify factors predictive of postoperative complications.
Fifty‐nine patients (91 breasts) were included, of whom 27 (35 breasts) developed a surgical complication. Reoperations were performed in 29 breasts (32 per cent), with prosthesis removal in 22 (24 per cent). In multivariable analyses, mastectomy weight was associated with complications (odds ratio (OR) 1·94, 95 per cent c.i. 1·33 to 2·83), reoperations (OR 1·70, 1·12 to 2·59) and removal of the implant (OR 1·55, 1·11 to 2·17). Younger patients (OR 1·07, 1·01 to 1·13) and those who received adjuvant chemotherapy (OR 4·83, 1·15 to 20·24) more frequently required reoperation. In univariable analyses, adjuvant radiotherapy showed a trend towards more complications (OR 7·23, 0·75 to 69·95) and removal of the implant (OR 5·12, 0·76 to 34·44), without reaching statistical significance.
Breast size appeared to be the most significant predictor of complications in DTI ADM‐assisted breast reconstruction. The technique should preferably be performed in patients with small to moderate sized breasts. Registration number: NTR5446 (
You may also be interested in
Meta‐analysis of the diagnostic accuracy of ultrasound‐guided fine‐needle aspiration and core needle biopsy in diagnosing axillary lymph node metastasis.
Authors: I. Balasubramanian, C. A. Fleming, M. A. Corrigan, H. P. Redmond, M. J. Kerin, A. J. Lowery et al.
Notes: CNB better
Meta‐analysis of the cumulative risk of endometrial malignancy and systematic review of endometrial surveillance in extended tamoxifen therapy. BJS 2018; 105: 1098-1106.
Authors: C. A. Fleming, H. M. Heneghan, D. O'Brien, D. P. McCartan, E. W. McDermott, R. S. Prichard et al.
Notes: Counselling of patients important
Breast‐conserving surgery followed by whole‐breast irradiation offers survival benefits over mastectomy without irradiation.
Authors: J. de Boniface, J. Frisell, L. Bergkvist, Y. Andersson
Notes: RT to lower axilla key?
Is axillary ultrasound imaging necessary for all patients with breast cancer?. BJS 2018; 105: 930-932.
Authors: M. Ahmed, M. Douek
Meta‐analysis of the oncological safety of autologous fat transfer after breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 1082-1097.
Authors: T. K. Krastev, S. J. Schop, J. Hommes, A. A. Piatkowski, E. M. Heuts, R. R. W. J. van der Hulst et al.
Notes: Lipofilling ok
Omission of surgery in older women with early breast cancer has an adverse impact on breast cancer‐specific survival.
Authors: S. E. Ward, P. D. Richards, J. L. Morgan, G. R. Holmes, J. W. Broggio, K. Collins et al.
Notes: Surgery should be first choice
Risk of recurrence and death in patients with breast cancer after delayed deep inferior epigastric perforator flap reconstruction.
Authors: H. Adam, A. C. Docherty Skogh, Å. Edsander Nord, I. Schultz, J. Gahm, P. Hall et al.
Notes: DIEP is safe
Population‐based study of the sensitivity of axillary ultrasound imaging in the preoperative staging of node‐positive invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. BJS 2018; 105: 987-995.
Authors: E. Morrow, A. Lannigan, J. Doughty, J. Litherland, J. Mansell, S. Stallard et al.
Notes: Less sensitive in lobular carcinoma
Routine histopathological examination after female‐to‐male gender‐confirming mastectomy. BJS 2018; 105: 885-892.
Authors: S. M. J. Van Renterghem, J. Van Dorpe, S. J. Monstrey, J. Defreyne, K. E. Y. Claes, M. Praet et al.
Notes: The case for
Meta‐analysis of neoadjuvant therapy and its impact in facilitating breast conservation in operable breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 469-481.
Authors: A. Karakatsanis, M. K. Tasoulis, F. Wärnberg, G. Nilsson, F. MacNeill
Notes: Still unnecessary mastectomies
Baseline factors predicting a response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy with implications for non‐surgical management of triple‐negative breast cancer. BJS 2018; 105: 535-543.
Authors: R. F. D. van la Parra, A. B. Tadros, C. M. Checka, G. M. Rauch, A. Lucci, B. D. Smith et al.
Notes: Ductal carcinoma in situ and microcalcification important
Authors: Z. E. Winters, J. R. Benson