Dai Hui, Cao Xiaoman, Wu Hao, Liang Faqing, Xie Yanyan, Chung Kawun, Zhang Qing, Li Tianyuan, Du Zhenggui
Department of General Surgery, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Breast Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Int J Surg. 2025 Jun 1;111(6):3838-3849. doi: 10.1097/JS9.0000000000002389. Epub 2025 Apr 10.
The applicability of reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) with direct-to-implant breast reconstruction (DIBR) is worth exploring in patients with large or severely ptotic breasts (LSPB) who were not recommended or even considered contraindicated in open NSM, conventional endoscopic NSM, and robotic NSM. The study aimed to compare the safety and aesthetic outcomes between patients with LSPB and non-LSPB (NLSPB) undergoing R-E-NSM with DIBR.
The single-center prospective cohort study enrolled 562 patients undergoing R-E-NSM and DIBR. Surgical safety, aesthetic outcomes, and oncologic safety were compared between patients with LSPB and NLSPB.
After propensity score matching, 88 LSPB patients and 256 NLSPB patients were included (median [interquartile range] follow-up time: 21.0 [13.8, 32.4] vs. 23.0 [10.6, 32.2] months, P = 0.889). The mastectomy weight was significantly higher in the LSPB group (576.6 ± 144.8 g vs. 330.1 ± 105.7 g, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in any complications (27.3% vs. 22.7%, P = 0.381), major complications (6.8% vs. 3.1%, P = 0.230), minor complications (20.5% vs. 21.1%, P = 0.889) and implant-related complications (21.6% vs. 24.6%, P = 0.566) between the LSPB and the NLSPB groups. In the LSPB group, the Ueda scores in patients with air inflation adjustment technique (AIAT) were better than those without AIAT, though no significant difference ( P = 0.110). Compared to the NLSPB group without AIAT, the LSPB group with AIAT had similar Ueda scores ( P = 0.870) and a significantly higher increase in BREAST-Q scores of breast satisfaction ( P = 0.004). Oncologic outcomes had no significant difference between the two groups (all P > 0.05).
R-E-NSM with DIBR and AIAT provides comparable surgical safety and aesthetic outcomes for patients with LSPB and NLSPB, offering a new option for LSPB patients.
对于乳房较大或严重下垂(LSPB)的患者,在开放性保乳手术、传统内镜保乳手术和机器人保乳手术中不被推荐甚至被视为禁忌的情况下,采用逆向顺序内镜保乳术(R-E-NSM)联合即刻乳房重建术(DIBR)的适用性值得探索。本研究旨在比较接受R-E-NSM联合DIBR的LSPB患者和非LSPB(NLSPB)患者的安全性和美学效果。
这项单中心前瞻性队列研究纳入了562例行R-E-NSM联合DIBR的患者。比较了LSPB患者和NLSPB患者的手术安全性、美学效果和肿瘤学安全性。
经过倾向评分匹配后,纳入了88例LSPB患者和256例NLSPB患者(中位[四分位间距]随访时间:21.0[13.8,32.4]个月对23.0[10.6,32.2]个月,P = 0.889)。LSPB组的乳房切除重量显著更高(576.6±144.8g对330.1±105.7g,P<0.001)。LSPB组和NLSPB组在任何并发症(27.3%对22.7%,P = 0.381)、主要并发症(6.8%对3.1%,P = 0.230)、次要并发症(20.5%对21.1%,P = 0.889)和植入物相关并发症(21.6%对24.6%,P = 0.566)方面均无显著差异。在LSPB组中,采用空气膨胀调整技术(AIAT)的患者的上田评分优于未采用AIAT的患者,尽管差异无统计学意义(P = 0.110)。与未采用AIAT的NLSPB组相比,采用AIAT的LSPB组的上田评分相似(P = 0.870),且乳房满意度的BREAST-Q评分显著更高(P = 0.004)。两组的肿瘤学结果无显著差异(所有P>0.05)。
R-E-NSM联合DIBR及AIAT为LSPB患者和NLSPB患者提供了相当的手术安全性和美学效果,为LSPB患者提供了一种新的选择。