Progress of conservative mastectomy with breast reconstruction for breast cancer_CHINESE JOURNAL OF BASES AND CLINICS IN GENERAL SURGERY

Authors：

GONG Junge , XU Jiawei ,  LI Hongyuan

1. Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing 400010, P. R. China;

Corresponding author：

LI Hongyuan, Email: hongy_li@hotmail.com

Keywords：

breast cancer; breast reconstruction; oncological safety; complication; satisfaction

DOI：

10.7507/1007-9424.202310028

Video：

Export PDF Favorites Scan Get Citation

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Objective To understand the current research status of conservative mastectomy with breast reconstruction for breast cancer, so as to provide a reference for surgeons and patients with breast cancer to choose surgical method. Method The recently domestic and foreign literature on the research of conservative mastectomy with breast reconstruction for breast cancer was reviewed and summarized. Results At present, conservative mastectomy mainly included nipple sparing mastectomy, skin sparing mastectomy, and skin reduction mastectomy. All three surgical methods were safe and effective in the treatment of breast cancer, and the complications could be controlled. When combined with breast reconstruction, the better cosmetic effect could be obtained, and the postoperative satisfaction and quality of life of patients were markedly improved. Conclusions After comprehensively preoperative evaluation for patients with breast cancer, conservative mastectomy provides a treatment choice for them. After conservative mastectomy, individualized reconstruction scheme is formulated according to size and sagging degree of breast, as well as individual expectations of patients, which can obtain a higher quality of life while treating diseases for patients with breast cancer.

Citation： GONG Junge, XU Jiawei, LI Hongyuan. Progress of conservative mastectomy with breast reconstruction for breast cancer. CHINESE JOURNAL OF BASES AND CLINICS IN GENERAL SURGERY, 2024, 31(2): 236-242. doi: 10.7507/1007-9424.202310028 Copy

1.	Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, et al. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(1): 7-33.
2.	Greenway RM, Schlossberg L, Dooley WC. Fifteen-year series of skin-sparing mastectomy for stage 0 to 2 breast cancer. Am J Surg, 2005, 190(6): 918-922.
3.	Drucker-Zertuche M, Robles-Vidal C. A 7 year experience with immediate breast reconstruction after skin sparing mastectomy for cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2007, 33(2): 140-146.
4.	Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, et al. The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg, 2009, 249(3): 461-468.
5.	Kim HJ, Park EH, Lim WS, et al. Nipple areola skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure: a single center study. Ann Surg, 2010, 251(3): 493-498.
6.	Romics L, Chew BK, Weiler-Mithoff E, et al. Ten-year follow-up of skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Br J Surg, 2012, 99(6): 799-806.
7.	Timbrell S, Al-Himdani S, Shaw O, et al. Comparison of local recurrence after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy performed in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(4): 1071-1076.
8.	Yamashita Y, Tsunoda H, Nagura N, et al. Long-term oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer, 2021, 21(4): 352-359.
9.	Galimberti V, Vicini E, Corso G, et al. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. Breast, 2017, 34 Suppl 1(Suppl 1): S82-S84.
10.	Lanitis S, Tekkis PP, Sgourakis G, et al. Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Surg, 2010, 251(4): 632-639.
11.	Agha RA, Al Omran Y, Wellstead G, et al. Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing versus skin-sparing mastectomy. BJS Open, 2018, 3(2): 135-145.
12.	Ogiya A, Nagura N, Shimo A, et al. Long-term outcomes of breast cancer patients with local recurrence after mastectomy undergoing immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective multi-institutional study of 4 153 cases. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(11): 6532-6540.
13.	中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会, 中国医师协会外科医师分会乳腺外科医师委员会, 上海市抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会. 乳腺肿瘤整形与乳房重建专家共识(2022年版). 中国癌症杂志, 2022, 32(9): 836-924.
14.	夏想厚, 俞洋, 扬红健. 保留乳头乳晕乳房切除-重建术研究进展. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(4): 243-246.
15.	Balci FL, Kara H, Dulgeroglu O, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with short tumor-nipple distance. Breast J, 2019, 25(4): 612-618.
16.	Frey JD, Salibian AA, Lee J, et al. Oncologic trends, outcomes, and risk factors for locoregional recurrence: an analysis of tumor-to-nipple distance and critical factors in therapeutic nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2019, 143(6): 1575-1585.
17.	Wu ZY, Kim HJ, Lee JW, et al. Breast cancer recurrence in the nipple-areola complex after nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction for invasive breast cancer. JAMA Surg, 2019, 154(11): 1030-1037.
18.	Wu ZY, Han HH, Kim HJ, et al. Locoregional recurrence following nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: patterns and prognostic significance. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2021, 47(6): 1309-1315.
19.	Sakurai T, Zhang N, Suzuma T, et al. Long-term follow-up of nipple-sparing mastectomy without radiotherapy: a single center study at a Japanese institution. Med Oncol, 2013, 30(1): 481.
20.	Moo TA, Pinchinat T, Mays S, et al. Oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol, 2016, 23(10): 3221-3225.
21.	Smith BL, Tang R, Rai U, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in women with breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg, 2017, 225(3): 361-365.
22.	Cho JH, Park JM, Park HS, et al. Oncologic outcomes in nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction and total mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in women with breast cancer: a machine-learning analysis. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(12): 7281-7290.
23.	Fu M, Chen Q, Zeng L, et al. Prognosis comparison between nipple-sparing mastectomy and total mastectomy in breast cancer: a case-control study after propensity score matching. Ann Surg Oncol, 2022, 29(4): 2221-2230.
24.	Wu ZY, Han HH, Kim HJ, et al. A propensity score-matched analysis of long-term oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing versus conventional mastectomy for locally advanced breast cancer. Ann Surg, 2022, 276(2): 386-390.
25.	Casella D, Fusario D, Cassetti D, et al. Controlateral symmetrisation in SRM for Breast cancer: now or then? Immediate versus delayed symmetrisation in a two-stage breast reconstruction. Curr Oncol, 2022, 29(12): 9391-9400.
26.	Maruccia M, Elia R, Gurrado A, et al. Skin-reducing mastectomy and pre-pectoral breast reconstruction in large ptotic breasts. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2020, 44(3): 664-672.
27.	Marcasciano M, Torto FL, Codolini L, et al. “Hook Shape” nipple-sparing mastectomy and prepectoral implant reconstruction: technique, results and outcomes from a preliminary case series. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2023, 47(2): 546-556.
28.	Caputo GG, Pisano G, Albanese R, et al. Immediate pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction after J-pattern skin reducing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023 Aug 29.
29.	Char S, Bloom JA, Erlichman Z, et al. A comprehensive literature review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) among common breast reconstruction options: what types of breast reconstruction score well?. Breast J, 2021, 27(4): 322-329.
30.	Romanoff A, Zabor EC, Stempel M, et al. A comparison of patient-reported outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy and conventional mastectomy with reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol, 2018, 25(10): 2909-2916.
31.	Reefy S, Patani N, Anderson A, et al. Oncological outcome and patient satisfaction with skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective observational study. BMC Cancer, 2010, 10: 171.
32.	Kokosis G, Stern CS, Shamsunder MG, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis of satisfaction and quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2022, 150(6): 1214e-1223e.
33.	Djohan R, Gage E, Gatherwright J, et al. Patient satisfaction following nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: an 8-year outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2010, 125(3): 818-829.
34.	Mallon P, Feron JG, Couturaud B, et al. The role of nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2013, 131(5): 969-984.
35.	Davies K, Allan L, Roblin P, et al. Factors affecting post-operative complications following skin sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. Breast, 2011, 20(1): 21-25.
36.	Frey JD, Choi M, Salibian AA, et al. Comparison of outcomes with tissue expander, immediate implant, and autologous breast reconstruction in greater than 1 000 nipple-sparing mastectomies. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017, 139(6): 1300-1310.
37.	Kracoff S, Benkler M, Allweis TM, et al. Does nipple sparing mastectomy affect the postoperative complication rate after breast reconstruction? Comparison of postoperative complications after nipple sparing mastectomy vs skin sparing mastectomy. Breast J, 2019, 25(4): 755-756.
38.	Colwell AS, Tessler O, Lin AM, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of complications, reconstruction outcomes, and 5-year trends. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2014, 133(3): 496-506.
39.	Nolan IT, Farajzadeh MM, Boyd CJ, et al. Do we need acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral breast reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 2023, 86: 251-260.
40.	Alcon A, Rosser M, Gedallovich J, et al. Long-term outcomes in prepectoral versus subpectoral two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023, 152(2): 273-280.
41.	Muto M, Satake T, Tsunoda Y, et al. Lateral thoracic vessel as a recipient vessel in immediate breast reconstruction after nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy: experience with 270 flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023, 151(6): 1157-1167.
42.	Gurrado A, Pasculli A, Toma A, et al. Mastectomy with one-stage or two-stage reconstruction in breast cancer: analysis of early outcomes and patient’s satisfaction. Updates Surg, 2023, 75(1): 235-243.
43.	von Glinski M, Holler N, Kümmel S, et al. Autologous vs. implant-based breast reconstruction after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy—A deeper insight considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes. Front Surg, 2022, 9: 903734.
44.	Daar DA, Abdou SA, Rosario L, et al. Is there a preferred incision location for nipple-sparing mastectomy? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2019, 143(5): 906e-919e.
45.	Dent BL, Cordeiro CN, Small K, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy via an inframammary fold incision with implant-based reconstruction in patients with prior cosmetic breast surgery. Aesthet Surg J, 2015, 35(5): 548-557.
46.	Bennett KG, Qi J, Kim HM, et al. Comparison of 2-year complication rates among common techniques for postmastectomy breast reconstruction. JAMA Surg, 2018, 153(10): 901-908.
47.	Wilkins EG, Hamill JB, Kim HM, et al. Complications in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: one-year outcomes of the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium (MROC) study. Ann Surg, 2018, 267(1): 164-170.
48.	曹一鸣, 韦长元, 莫军扬, 等. 乳房重建术后并发症影响因素的分析. 重庆医学, 2016, 45(5): 628-631.
49.	Tsoi B, Ziolkowski NI, Thoma A, et al. Safety of tissue expander/implant versus autologous abdominal tissue breast reconstruction in postmastectomy breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2014, 133(2): 234-249.
50.	Folli S, Mingozzi M, Curcio A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: an alternative technique for large ptotic breasts. J Am Coll Surg, 2015, 220(5): e65-e69.
51.	Castagnetti F, Coiro S, Foroni M, et al. Reply to letter to the editor: a pure autologous dermal graft and dermal flap pocket in prepectoral implant reconstruction after skin-reducing mastectomy: a one-stage autologous reconstruction alternative to acellular dermal matrices. Aesthetic plast surg, 2023, 47(suppl 1): 99-100.
52.	Inbal A, Gur E, Lemelman BT, et al. Optimizing patient selection for direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction using wise-pattern skin-reducing mastectomy in large and ptotic breasts. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2017, 41(5): 1058-1067.
53.	Yazar S, Bengur FB, Altinkaya A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction with or without skin reduction in patients with large ptotic breasts: a case-matched analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2021, 45(3): 956-967.

1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, et al. Cancer statistics, 2021. CA Cancer J Clin, 2021, 71(1): 7-33.
2. Greenway RM, Schlossberg L, Dooley WC. Fifteen-year series of skin-sparing mastectomy for stage 0 to 2 breast cancer. Am J Surg, 2005, 190(6): 918-922.
3. Drucker-Zertuche M, Robles-Vidal C. A 7 year experience with immediate breast reconstruction after skin sparing mastectomy for cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2007, 33(2): 140-146.
4. Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, et al. The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg, 2009, 249(3): 461-468.
5. Kim HJ, Park EH, Lim WS, et al. Nipple areola skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure: a single center study. Ann Surg, 2010, 251(3): 493-498.
6. Romics L, Chew BK, Weiler-Mithoff E, et al. Ten-year follow-up of skin-sparing mastectomy followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Br J Surg, 2012, 99(6): 799-806.
7. Timbrell S, Al-Himdani S, Shaw O, et al. Comparison of local recurrence after simple and skin-sparing mastectomy performed in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol, 2017, 24(4): 1071-1076.
8. Yamashita Y, Tsunoda H, Nagura N, et al. Long-term oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Clin Breast Cancer, 2021, 21(4): 352-359.
9. Galimberti V, Vicini E, Corso G, et al. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. Breast, 2017, 34 Suppl 1(Suppl 1): S82-S84.
10. Lanitis S, Tekkis PP, Sgourakis G, et al. Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer: a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Surg, 2010, 251(4): 632-639.
11. Agha RA, Al Omran Y, Wellstead G, et al. Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing versus skin-sparing mastectomy. BJS Open, 2018, 3(2): 135-145.
12. Ogiya A, Nagura N, Shimo A, et al. Long-term outcomes of breast cancer patients with local recurrence after mastectomy undergoing immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective multi-institutional study of 4 153 cases. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(11): 6532-6540.
13. 中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会, 中国医师协会外科医师分会乳腺外科医师委员会, 上海市抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会. 乳腺肿瘤整形与乳房重建专家共识(2022年版). 中国癌症杂志, 2022, 32(9): 836-924.
14. 夏想厚, 俞洋, 扬红健. 保留乳头乳晕乳房切除-重建术研究进展. 中华乳腺病杂志(电子版), 2016, 10(4): 243-246.
15. Balci FL, Kara H, Dulgeroglu O, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with short tumor-nipple distance. Breast J, 2019, 25(4): 612-618.
16. Frey JD, Salibian AA, Lee J, et al. Oncologic trends, outcomes, and risk factors for locoregional recurrence: an analysis of tumor-to-nipple distance and critical factors in therapeutic nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2019, 143(6): 1575-1585.
17. Wu ZY, Kim HJ, Lee JW, et al. Breast cancer recurrence in the nipple-areola complex after nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction for invasive breast cancer. JAMA Surg, 2019, 154(11): 1030-1037.
18. Wu ZY, Han HH, Kim HJ, et al. Locoregional recurrence following nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: patterns and prognostic significance. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2021, 47(6): 1309-1315.
19. Sakurai T, Zhang N, Suzuma T, et al. Long-term follow-up of nipple-sparing mastectomy without radiotherapy: a single center study at a Japanese institution. Med Oncol, 2013, 30(1): 481.
20. Moo TA, Pinchinat T, Mays S, et al. Oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol, 2016, 23(10): 3221-3225.
21. Smith BL, Tang R, Rai U, et al. Oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in women with breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg, 2017, 225(3): 361-365.
22. Cho JH, Park JM, Park HS, et al. Oncologic outcomes in nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate reconstruction and total mastectomy with immediate reconstruction in women with breast cancer: a machine-learning analysis. Ann Surg Oncol, 2023, 30(12): 7281-7290.
23. Fu M, Chen Q, Zeng L, et al. Prognosis comparison between nipple-sparing mastectomy and total mastectomy in breast cancer: a case-control study after propensity score matching. Ann Surg Oncol, 2022, 29(4): 2221-2230.
24. Wu ZY, Han HH, Kim HJ, et al. A propensity score-matched analysis of long-term oncologic outcomes after nipple-sparing versus conventional mastectomy for locally advanced breast cancer. Ann Surg, 2022, 276(2): 386-390.
25. Casella D, Fusario D, Cassetti D, et al. Controlateral symmetrisation in SRM for Breast cancer: now or then? Immediate versus delayed symmetrisation in a two-stage breast reconstruction. Curr Oncol, 2022, 29(12): 9391-9400.
26. Maruccia M, Elia R, Gurrado A, et al. Skin-reducing mastectomy and pre-pectoral breast reconstruction in large ptotic breasts. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2020, 44(3): 664-672.
27. Marcasciano M, Torto FL, Codolini L, et al. “Hook Shape” nipple-sparing mastectomy and prepectoral implant reconstruction: technique, results and outcomes from a preliminary case series. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2023, 47(2): 546-556.
28. Caputo GG, Pisano G, Albanese R, et al. Immediate pre-pectoral implant-based breast reconstruction after J-pattern skin reducing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023 Aug 29.
29. Char S, Bloom JA, Erlichman Z, et al. A comprehensive literature review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) among common breast reconstruction options: what types of breast reconstruction score well?. Breast J, 2021, 27(4): 322-329.
30. Romanoff A, Zabor EC, Stempel M, et al. A comparison of patient-reported outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy and conventional mastectomy with reconstruction. Ann Surg Oncol, 2018, 25(10): 2909-2916.
31. Reefy S, Patani N, Anderson A, et al. Oncological outcome and patient satisfaction with skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective observational study. BMC Cancer, 2010, 10: 171.
32. Kokosis G, Stern CS, Shamsunder MG, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction: a propensity score-matched analysis of satisfaction and quality of life. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2022, 150(6): 1214e-1223e.
33. Djohan R, Gage E, Gatherwright J, et al. Patient satisfaction following nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: an 8-year outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2010, 125(3): 818-829.
34. Mallon P, Feron JG, Couturaud B, et al. The role of nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: a comprehensive review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2013, 131(5): 969-984.
35. Davies K, Allan L, Roblin P, et al. Factors affecting post-operative complications following skin sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. Breast, 2011, 20(1): 21-25.
36. Frey JD, Choi M, Salibian AA, et al. Comparison of outcomes with tissue expander, immediate implant, and autologous breast reconstruction in greater than 1 000 nipple-sparing mastectomies. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2017, 139(6): 1300-1310.
37. Kracoff S, Benkler M, Allweis TM, et al. Does nipple sparing mastectomy affect the postoperative complication rate after breast reconstruction? Comparison of postoperative complications after nipple sparing mastectomy vs skin sparing mastectomy. Breast J, 2019, 25(4): 755-756.
38. Colwell AS, Tessler O, Lin AM, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of complications, reconstruction outcomes, and 5-year trends. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2014, 133(3): 496-506.
39. Nolan IT, Farajzadeh MM, Boyd CJ, et al. Do we need acellular dermal matrix in prepectoral breast reconstruction? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 2023, 86: 251-260.
40. Alcon A, Rosser M, Gedallovich J, et al. Long-term outcomes in prepectoral versus subpectoral two-stage implant-based breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023, 152(2): 273-280.
41. Muto M, Satake T, Tsunoda Y, et al. Lateral thoracic vessel as a recipient vessel in immediate breast reconstruction after nipple/skin-sparing mastectomy: experience with 270 flaps. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2023, 151(6): 1157-1167.
42. Gurrado A, Pasculli A, Toma A, et al. Mastectomy with one-stage or two-stage reconstruction in breast cancer: analysis of early outcomes and patient’s satisfaction. Updates Surg, 2023, 75(1): 235-243.
43. von Glinski M, Holler N, Kümmel S, et al. Autologous vs. implant-based breast reconstruction after skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomy—A deeper insight considering surgical and patient-reported outcomes. Front Surg, 2022, 9: 903734.
44. Daar DA, Abdou SA, Rosario L, et al. Is there a preferred incision location for nipple-sparing mastectomy? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2019, 143(5): 906e-919e.
45. Dent BL, Cordeiro CN, Small K, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy via an inframammary fold incision with implant-based reconstruction in patients with prior cosmetic breast surgery. Aesthet Surg J, 2015, 35(5): 548-557.
46. Bennett KG, Qi J, Kim HM, et al. Comparison of 2-year complication rates among common techniques for postmastectomy breast reconstruction. JAMA Surg, 2018, 153(10): 901-908.
47. Wilkins EG, Hamill JB, Kim HM, et al. Complications in postmastectomy breast reconstruction: one-year outcomes of the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium (MROC) study. Ann Surg, 2018, 267(1): 164-170.
48. 曹一鸣, 韦长元, 莫军扬, 等. 乳房重建术后并发症影响因素的分析. 重庆医学, 2016, 45(5): 628-631.
49. Tsoi B, Ziolkowski NI, Thoma A, et al. Safety of tissue expander/implant versus autologous abdominal tissue breast reconstruction in postmastectomy breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Plast Reconstr Surg, 2014, 133(2): 234-249.
50. Folli S, Mingozzi M, Curcio A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: an alternative technique for large ptotic breasts. J Am Coll Surg, 2015, 220(5): e65-e69.
51. Castagnetti F, Coiro S, Foroni M, et al. Reply to letter to the editor: a pure autologous dermal graft and dermal flap pocket in prepectoral implant reconstruction after skin-reducing mastectomy: a one-stage autologous reconstruction alternative to acellular dermal matrices. Aesthetic plast surg, 2023, 47(suppl 1): 99-100.
52. Inbal A, Gur E, Lemelman BT, et al. Optimizing patient selection for direct-to-implant immediate breast reconstruction using wise-pattern skin-reducing mastectomy in large and ptotic breasts. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2017, 41(5): 1058-1067.
53. Yazar S, Bengur FB, Altinkaya A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction with or without skin reduction in patients with large ptotic breasts: a case-matched analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 2021, 45(3): 956-967.

CHINESE JOURNAL OF BASES AND CLINICS IN GENERAL SURGERY

Progress of conservative mastectomy with breast reconstruction for breast cancer

Abstract Full text Figures/Tables Video References Cited by

Previous Article

Next Article

Format

Content