Advertisement

Surgical and oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in an Asian population

  • Yvonne Ying-Ru Ng
  • Veronique Kiak-Mien Tan
  • Wan Sze Pek
  • Jasmine Hui-Er Chang
  • Yirong Sim
  • Kong Wee Ong
  • Wei Sean Yong
  • Preetha Madhukumar
  • Chow Yin Wong
  • Yee Siang Ong
  • Bien Keem Tan
  • Benita Kiat Tee Tan
Original Article
  • 29 Downloads

Abstract

Background

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) allows for excellent postmastectomy reconstruction aesthetics and is used for both therapeutic and risk-reducing purposes. Reservations regarding the potential for locoregional recurrence and concerns about nipple–areolar complex (NAC) necrosis remain amongst many surgeons. We review the surgical and oncological outcomes after NSM in our institution.

Methods

All NSM cases at the National Cancer Centre Singapore and Singapore General Hospital between 2005 and 2015 were reviewed. Tumour characteristics, reconstruction methods, surgical and oncological outcomes are described.

Results

A total of 139 NSMs were performed for 130 patients. The median age was 46 years (range 21–66). The use of NSM increased from 2% of all breast reconstructions in 2005 to 37% in 2015. The majority (n = 119; 86%) were for cancer treatment and 20 (14%) for risk-reducing purposes. Among those performed for cancer, patients mainly had early stage breast cancer (n = 106, 89%). Autologous reconstruction (n = 111, 80%) was most common. Early complications requiring surgical intervention occurred in 24 (17%) NSMs, including 9 partial/complete flap loss and 2 complete NAC loss. Smoking, previous breast radiation and periareolar incision were all not associated with a higher re-intervention rate (p = 0.93, 0.41 and 0.91, respectively). Median follow-up was 43 months (range 5–145). Five patients (4%) developed local recurrence, including 2 NAC recurrences. The 2- and 5-year overall survival rate is 97 and 90%, respectively.

Conclusion

NSM is an oncologically safe procedure in selected patients with acceptable low complication rates.

Keywords

Nipple-sparing mastectomy Immediate breast reconstruction Asian 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

All authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

References

  1. 1.
    Sisco M, Kyrillos AM, Lapin BR, Wang CE, Yao KA. Trends and variation in the use of nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer in the United States. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;160(1):111–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Murthy V, Chamberlain RS. Defining a place for nipple sparing mastectomy in modern breast care: an evidence based review. Breast J. 2013;19(6):571–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Orazlesi L, Casella D, Santi C, Cecconi L, Murgo R, Rinaldi S, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: surgical and oncological outcomes from a national multicentric registry with 913 patients (1006 cases) over a six year period. Breast. 2016;25:75–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Julian TB, Venditti CA, Duggal S. Landmark clinical trials influencing surgical management of non-invasive and invasive breast cancer. Breast J. 2015;21(1):60–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ng YY, Tan VK, Goh TL, Yong WS, Wong CY, Ho GH, et al. Trends in post-mastectomy reconstruction in an Asian population: a 12-year institutional review. Breast J. 2017;23(1):59–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Sim Y, Tan VK, Ho GH, Wong CY, Madhukumar P, Tan BK, et al. Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in an Asian population. Breast. 2014;23(1):56–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Agarwal S, Kidwell KM, Kraft CT, Kozlow JH, Sabel MS, Chung KC. Defining the relationship between patient decisions to undergo breast reconstruction and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(3):661–70.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rodriguez-Unda NA, Bello RJ, Clarke-Pearson EM, Sanyal A, Cooney CM, Manahan MA, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy improves long-term nipple but not skin sensation after breast reconstruction: quantification of long-term sensation in nipple sparing versus non-nipple sparing mastectomy. Ann Plast Surg. 2017;78(6):697–703.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wei CH, Scott AM, Price AN, Miller HC, Klassen AF, Jhanwar SM, et al. Psychosocial and sexual well-being following nipple-sparing mastectomy and reconstruction. Breast J. 2016;22(1):10–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Byon W, Kim E, Kwon J, Park YL, Park C. Magnetic resonance imaging and clinicopathological factors for the detection of occult nipple involvement in breast cancer patients. J Breast Cancer. 2014;17(4):386–92.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wapnir I, Dua M, Kieryn A, Paro J, Morrison D, Kahn D, et al. Intraoperative imaging of nipple perfusion patterns and ischemic complications in nipple-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(1):100–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frey JD, Alperovich M, Kim JC, Axelrod DM, Shapiro RL, Choi M, et al. Oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-institution experience. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113(1):8–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Headon HL, Kasem A, Mokbei K. The oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of the literature with a pooled analysis of 12,358 procedures. Arch Plast Surg. 2016;43(4):328–38.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Smith BL, Tang R, Rai U, Plichta JK, Colwell AS, Gadd MA, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in women with breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2017;225(3):361–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yao K, Liederback E, Tang R, Lei L, Czechura T, Sisco M, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in BRCA 1/2 mutations carriers: an interim analysis and review of the literature. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(2):370–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fatouros M, Baltoyiannis G, Roukos DH. The predominant role of surgery in the prevention and new trends in the surgical treatment of women with BRCA1⁄2 mutations. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(1):21–33.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jara-Lazaro AR, Thilagaratnam S, Tan PH. Breast cancer in Singapore: some perspectives. Breast Cancer. 2010;17(1):23–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gerber B, Krause A, Reimer T, Muller H, Kuchenmeister I, Makovitzky J, et al. Skin-sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure. Ann Surg. 2003;238(1):120–7.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lagios MD, Gates EA, Westdahl, et al. A guide to the frequency of nipple involvement in breast cancer: a study of 149 consecutive mastectomies using a serial subgross and correlated radiographic technique. Am J Surg. 1979;138:135–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Agresti R, Sandri M, Gennaro M, Bianchi G, Maugeri I, Rampa M, et al. Evaluation of local oncologic safety in nipple-areola complex-sparing mastectomy after primary chemotherapy: a propensity score-matched study. Clin Breast Cancer. 2017;17(3):219–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ponzone R, Maggiorotto F, Carabalona S, Rivolin A, Pisacane A, Kubatzki F, et al. MRI and intraoperative pathology to predict nipple-areola complex (NAC) involvement in patients undergoing NAC-sparing mastectomy. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(14):1882–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Santoro S, Loreti A, Cavaliere F, Costarelli L, La Pinta M, Manna E, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy is not a contraindication for nipple sparing mastectomy. Breast. 2015;24(5):661–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shimo A, Tsugawa K, Tsuchiya S, Yoshie R, Tsuchiya K, Uejima T, et al. Oncologic outcomes and technical considerations of nipple-sparing mastectomies in breast cancer: experience of 425 cases from a single institution. Breast cancer. 2016;23(6):851–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Komorowski AL, Zanini V, Regolo L, Carolei A, Wysocki WM, Costa A. Necrotic complications after nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy. World J Surg. 2006;30(8):1410–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Chang DW, Recce GP, Wang B, Robb GL, Miller MJ, Evans GR, et al. Effect of smoking on complications in patients undergoing free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000;105:2374–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Donovan CA, Harit AP, Chung A, Bao J, Guiliano AE, Amersi F. Oncological and surgical outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy: Do incisions matter? Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(10):3226–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sood S, Elder E, French J. Nipple-sparing mastectomy with implant reconstruction: the Westmead experience. ANZ J Surg. 2015;85(5):363–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Regolo L, Ballardini B, Gallarotti E, Scoccia E, Zanini V, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: an innovative skin incision for an alternative approach. The Breast. 2008;17(1):8–11.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Griffiths M, Chae MP, Rozen WM. Indocyanine green-based fluorescent angiography in breast reconstruction. Gland Surg. 2016;5(2):133–49.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Diep GK, Hui JY, Marmor S, Cunningham BL, Choudry U, Portschy PR, et al. Postmastectomy reconstruction outcomes after intraoperative evaluation with indocyanine green angiography versus clinical assessment. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(12):4080–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Japanese Breast Cancer Society 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yvonne Ying-Ru Ng
    • 1
  • Veronique Kiak-Mien Tan
    • 2
  • Wan Sze Pek
    • 3
  • Jasmine Hui-Er Chang
    • 1
  • Yirong Sim
    • 2
  • Kong Wee Ong
    • 2
  • Wei Sean Yong
    • 2
  • Preetha Madhukumar
    • 2
  • Chow Yin Wong
    • 1
  • Yee Siang Ong
    • 3
  • Bien Keem Tan
    • 3
  • Benita Kiat Tee Tan
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of General SurgerySingapore General HospitalSingaporeSingapore
  2. 2.Division of Surgical OncologyNational Cancer Centre SingaporeSingaporeSingapore
  3. 3.Department of Plastics, Reconstructive and Aesthetic SurgerySingapore General HospitalSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations