13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Breast Reconstruction and Radiation Therapy

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Purpose:

          The optimal approach to the integration of postmastectomy reconstruction and radiation therapy is not well-established. This review will summarize current literature pertaining to the most common types of reconstruction in the setting of postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT).

          Data Sources:

          Literature from PubMed was reviewed from 2000 to 2016.

          Study Selection:

          Studies were selected with relevance to “postmastectomy breast reconstruction,” “breast reconstruction,” and “breast reconstructive methods and PMRT.” Surgical outcomes, patient satisfaction, and cost-effectiveness were examined.

          Data Extraction:

          Data from publications was extracted, summarized, and converted to a table.

          Results of Data Synthesis:

          Implant-based techniques are on the rise, in the setting of PMRT. Implant-based methods are more affordable in the short term and result in immediate breast-mound formation compared to autologous methods. When compared to implant-based reconstruction with PMRT, autologous reconstruction with PMRT results in better quality of life (QoL) and sensory recovery as well as fewer complications and failures. Among autologous flaps, deep inferior epigastric perforator flaps are considered superior to transverse rectus abdominal muscle (TRAM) pedicled flaps and may be more suitable for PMRT. Latissimus dorsi and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps are also viable options. In delayed autologous, which may be advantageous for high-risk patients, the optimal timing to delay surgery after radiation therapy is unknown. Reconstruction with a 2-stage tissue expander-implant technique offers good to excellent cosmetic outcomes in the setting of PMRT, although there may be complications in this 2-stage process.

          Conclusion:

          Surgical, cosmetic, quality of life, and life expectancy must be taken into account when selecting the way to integrate breast reconstruction and PMRT.

          Related collections

          Most cited references42

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Patient-reported Quality of Life and Satisfaction With Cosmetic Outcomes After Breast Conservation and Mastectomy With and Without Reconstruction: Results of a Survey of Breast Cancer Survivors.

          Although breast conservation is therapeutically equivalent to mastectomy for most patients with early-stage breast cancer, an increasing number of patients are pursuing mastectomy, which may be followed by breast reconstruction. We sought to evaluate long-term quality of life and cosmetic outcomes after different locoregional management approaches, as perceived by patients themselves.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The impact of postmastectomy radiotherapy on two-stage implant breast reconstruction: an analysis of long-term surgical outcomes, aesthetic results, and satisfaction over 13 years.

            Postmastectomy radiation therapy is increasingly indicated in patients with node-positive breast cancer. The authors prospectively evaluated long-term outcomes in patients with two-stage implant-based reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy to the permanent implant.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Comparison of immediate and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy.

              Tumor pathologic features and the extent of nodal involvement dictate whether radiation therapy is given after mastectomy for breast cancer. It is generally well accepted that radiation negatively influences the outcome of implant-based breast reconstruction. However, the long-term effect of radiation therapy on the outcome of breast reconstruction with the free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap is still unclear. For patients who need postmastectomy radiation therapy, the optimal timing of TRAM flap reconstruction is controversial. This study compares the outcome of immediate and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients who received postmastectomy radiation therapy. All patients at The University of Texas M. D. Anderson Cancer Center who received postmastectomy radiation therapy and who also underwent free TRAM flap breast reconstruction between January of 1988 and December of 1998 were included in the study. Patients who received radiation therapy before delayed TRAM flap reconstruction were compared with patients who underwent immediate TRAM flap reconstruction before radiation therapy. Early and late complications were compared between the two groups. Early complications included vessel thrombosis, partial or total flap loss, mastectomy skin flap necrosis, and local wound-healing problems, whereas late complications included fat necrosis, volume loss, and flap contracture of free TRAM breast mounds. Late complications were evaluated at least 1 year after the completion of radiation therapy for patients who had delayed reconstruction and at least 1 year after reconstruction for patients who had immediate reconstruction. During the study period, 32 patients had immediate TRAM flap reconstruction before radiation therapy and 70 patients had radiation therapy before TRAM flap reconstruction. Mean follow-up times for the immediate reconstruction and delayed reconstruction groups were 3 and 5 years, respectively. The mean radiation dose was 50 Gy in the immediate reconstruction group and 51 Gy in the delayed reconstruction group. One complete flap loss occurred in the delayed reconstruction group, and no flap loss occurred in the immediate reconstruction group. The incidence of early complications did not differ significantly between the two groups. However, the incidence of late complications was significantly higher in the immediate reconstruction group than in the delayed reconstruction group (87.5 percent versus 8.6 percent; p = 0.000). Nine patients (28 percent) in the immediate reconstruction group required an additional flap to correct the distorted contour from flap shrinkage and severe flap contraction. These findings indicate that, in patients who are candidates for free TRAM flap breast reconstruction and need postmastectomy radiation therapy, reconstruction should be delayed until radiation therapy is complete.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Cancer Control
                CCX
                spccx
                Cancer Control : Journal of the Moffitt Cancer Center
                SAGE Publications (Sage CA: Los Angeles, CA )
                1073-2748
                1526-2359
                22 August 2018
                Jan-Dec 2018
                : 25
                : 1
                : 1073274818795489
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Morsani College of Medicine, University of South Florida, Tampa, FL, USA
                [2 ]Department of Radiation Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
                Author notes
                [*]Amber G. Orman, Department of Radiation Oncology, Florida Hospital Cancer Institute, 2501 N Orange Ave, Orlando, FL, USA. Email: amber.g.brannan@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                10.1177_1073274818795489
                10.1177/1073274818795489
                6108018
                30132338
                5a81b96f-9922-47f9-9719-1e4ad6d36776
                © The Author(s) 2018

                This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License ( http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages ( https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).

                History
                : 30 August 2017
                : 6 November 2017
                : 27 July 2018
                Categories
                Review
                Custom metadata
                January-December 2018

                breast reconstruction,implant reconstruction,autologous reconstruction,pmrt,quality of life

                Comments

                Comment on this article