Postoperative Outcomes in Prepectoral Versus Retropectoral Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction Across Body Mass Index Categories

Overview

Journal Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open

Date 2025 Jan 13

PMID 39802279

Authors

Gauthier Zinner

Jerome Martineau

Giang Thanh Lam

Daniel Correia

Daniel F Kalbermatten

Carlo M Oranges

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Prepectoral (PP) immediate implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is gaining popularity over the retropectoral (RP) breast reconstruction technique. This study aims to compare complication rates across different body mass index (BMI) groups in patients undergoing PP or RP IBBR.

Methods: A monocentric retrospective analysis was conducted on patients who underwent mastectomy and IBBR from January 2018 to December 2023. Preoperative characteristics, BMI, type of mastectomy procedure, PP or RR implant placement, and postoperative outcomes were collected and analyzed.

Results: A total of 217 patients were included, representing 276 IBBRs. The overall complication rate on a per breast basis was 26.4%. The overall complication rate did not differ across BMI groups ( = 0.314) and between PP and RP IBBR ( = 0.8083). In the PP group, anemia rate increased with low BMI (odds ratio [OR] 0.0215, = 0.033) and skin complications were more frequent with higher BMI (OR 0.0428, = 0.0389). In the RP group, higher BMI was correlated with a higher seroma rate in the RP IBBR group (OR 1.2045, = 0.0334) and a longer hospital length of stay (coefficient 0.248, adjusted ² 0.082, SD 0.098, = 0.014).

Conclusions: PP IBBR was associated with a significantly higher rate of anemia in patients with low BMI, and a significantly higher rate of skin complications in high BMI. RP IBBR was associated with higher seroma rate and longer hospital length of stay in patients with higher BMI.

References

Weinzierl A, Schmauss D, Brucato D, Harder Y . Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy, from the Subpectoral to the Prepectoral Approach: An Evidence-Based Change of Mind?. J Clin Med. 2022; 11(11). PMC: 9181810. DOI: 10.3390/jcm11113079. View

Castaldi M, George G, Stoller C, Parsikia A, McNelis J . Independent Predictors of Venous Thromboembolism in Patients Undergoing Reconstructive Breast Cancer Surgery. Plast Surg (Oakv). 2021; 29(3):160-168. PMC: 8436332. DOI: 10.1177/2292550320967397. View

Ribuffo D, Berna G, De Vita R, Di Benedetto G, Cigna E, Greco M . Dual-Plane Retro-pectoral Versus Pre-pectoral DTI Breast Reconstruction: An Italian Multicenter Experience. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2020; 45(1):51-60. PMC: 7886728. DOI: 10.1007/s00266-020-01892-y. View

Escobar-Domingo M, Bustos V, Kim E, Campbell T, Fanning J, Foppiani J . The impact of metabolic syndrome in breast reconstruction decision-making and postoperative outcomes: A nationwide analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2023; 89:21-29. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.11.042. View

Fischer J, Wes A, Tuggle C, Wu L . Venous thromboembolism risk in mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: analysis of the 2005 to 2011 American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program data sets. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014; 133(3):263e-273e. DOI: 10.1097/01.prs.0000438062.53914.22. View

Chopra S, Al-Ishaq Z, Vidya R . The Journey of Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction through Time. World J Plast Surg. 2021; 10(2):3-13. PMC: 8290458. DOI: 10.29252/wjps.10.2.3. View

Lardi A, Ho-Asjoe M, Mohanna P, Farhadi J . Immediate breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix: factors affecting outcome. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014; 67(8):1098-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2014.05.020. View

Caputo G, Mura S, Albanese R, Zingaretti N, Pier Camillo P . Seroma Formation in Pre-pectoral Implant-Based ADM Assisted Breast Reconstruction: A Comprehensive Review of Current Literature. Chirurgia (Bucur). 2021; 116(2 Suppl):16-23. DOI: 10.21614/chirurgia.116.2 Suppl.S16. View

Houvenaeghel G, Cohen M, Sabiani L, Van Troy A, Quilichini O, Charavil A . Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Pre-Pectoral or Sub-Pectoral Implant: Assessing Clinical Practice, Post-Surgical Outcomes, Patient's Satisfaction and Cost. J Surg Res (Houst). 2022; 5(3):500-510. PMC: 9793874. DOI: 10.26502/jsr.10020250. View

10.

Frey J, Salibian A, Karp N, Choi M . The Impact of Mastectomy Weight on Reconstructive Trends and Outcomes in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Progressively Greater Complications with Larger Breast Size. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2018; 141(6):795e-804e. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000004404. View

11.

Ukleikins S, Irmejs A, gilis A, Tauvena E, Maksimenko J, Trofimovics G . Body mass index and nipple preservation are major contributors to satisfaction and aesthetic outcome rates after implant-based immediate breast reconstruction. Contemp Oncol (Pozn). 2019; 23(2):96-99. PMC: 6630387. DOI: 10.5114/wo.2019.85881. View

12.

Atisha D, Alderman A, Kuhn L, Wilkins E . The impact of obesity on patient satisfaction with breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008; 121(6):1893-1899. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181715198. View

13.

Epstein S, Tran B, Cohen J, Lin S, Singhal D, Lee B . Racial disparities in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: National trends in utilization from 2005 to 2014. Cancer. 2018; 124(13):2774-2784. DOI: 10.1002/cncr.31395. View

14.

Dai Y, Han C, Weng X . Predict Postoperative Anemia of Patients: Nomogram Construction and Validation. Front Surg. 2022; 9:849761. PMC: 9222331. DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2022.849761. View

15.

Ostapenko E, Nixdorf L, Devyatko Y, Exner R, Wimmer K, Fitzal F . Prepectoral Versus Subpectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Systemic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022; 30(1):126-136. PMC: 9726796. DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12567-0. View

16.

Song Y, Zeng J, Tian X, Zheng H, Wu X . A review of different breast reconstruction methods. Am J Transl Res. 2023; 15(6):3846-3855. PMC: 10331689. View

17.

Lee K, Lee H, Jeon B, Mun G, Bang S, Pyon J . Impact of overweight/obesity on the development of hematoma following tissue expander-based breast reconstruction. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2021; . DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2020.08.105. View

18.

Leitner H, Pauzenberger R, Ederer I, Radtke C, Hacker S . BMI Specific Complications Following Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy. J Clin Med. 2021; 10(23). PMC: 8658513. DOI: 10.3390/jcm10235665. View

19.

Vrolijk J, Bargon C, Becherer B, Wilschut J, van Bommel A, Hommes J . Risk Factors for Unplanned Reoperation during the Expansion Phase in Two-Stage Breast Reconstruction in the Dutch Breast Implant Registry. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023; 154(1):33e-43e. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010945. View

20.

Lin A, Lorenzi R, Van Der Hulst J, Liao E, Austen Jr W, Webster A . A Decade of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Lessons Learned in 3035 Immediate Implant-Based Breast Reconstructions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2023; 153(2):277-287. DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010616. View