Advertisement

Revisions After Breast Reconstruction

  • Eduardo Gonzalez
  • Gastón Berman
Chapter

Abstract

Breast reconstruction (BR) is currently considered an integral part of breast cancer treatment. Various oncologic factors, such as tumor size and lymph node status as well as the type of sequelae in already operated patients, determine the approach that should be taken and the technique to be used after preparing a detailed report of the procedure and considering the patient’s preferences.

References

  1. 1.
    Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ (2009) Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:345–353CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spear S (2016) Underpromise. Plast Reconstr Surg 137(6):1961–1962CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L et al (2002) Twenty-year follow up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1227–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J et al (2002) Twenty-year follow up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347:1233–1241CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clough KB, Cuminet J, Fitoussi A et al (1998) Cosmetic sequalae after conservative treatment for breast cancer: classification and results of surgical correction. Ann Plast Surg 41:471–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Losken A, Dugal CS, Styblo TM et al (2014) A meta-analysis comparing breast conservation therapy alone to the oncoplastic technique. Ann Plast Surg 72(2):145–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fitoussi AD, Berry MG, Couturaud B et al (2010) Management of the post breast conservation therapy defect: extended follow-up and reclassification. Plast Reconstr Surg 125:783–791CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Spear SL, Shuck J, Hannan L et al (2014) Evaluating longterm outcomes following nipple-sparing mastectomy and reconstruction in the irradiated breast. Plast Reconstr Surg 133:605e–614eCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kronowitz SJ, Robb GL (2009) Radiation therapy and breast reconstruction: a critical review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg 124:395–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barry M, Kell MR (2011) Radiotherapy and breast reconstruction: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127:15–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Spear SL, Seruya M, Rao SS et al (2012) Two-stage prosthetic breast reconstruction using AlloDerm including outcomes of different timings of radiotherapy. Plast Reconstr Surg 130:1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rancati A, Pestalardo C, González E., Vidal L. Fat transfer in the delayed breast reconstruction after radiated mastectomy. IPRAS Journal. April 2012, P. 30. www.ipras.org
  13. 13.
    González E (2012) Utilidad de la lipotransferencia autóloga para corregir los defectos de la cirugía oncológica y oncoplástica mamaria y radioterapia. Rev Venez Oncol 24(3):256–269Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Amir A, Silfen R, Hauben DJ (2000) “Apron” flap and re-creation of the inframammary fold following TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 105(3):1024–1030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kroll S (2000) Breast reconstruction with autologous tissue. Art and artistry. Chapter 20. Breast mound revision surgery. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 293–311Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Eduardo Gonzalez
    • 1
  • Gastón Berman
    • 1
  1. 1.Mastology DepartmentInstituto de Oncología Angel H. Roffo, Universidad de Buenos AiresBuenos AiresArgentina

Personalised recommendations