Anshumi Desai, Rohan Mangal, Carolina Padilla, Kate McClintock, Seraphina Choi, Juan R Mella-Catinchi, John C Oeltjen, Devinder P Singh, Cristiane Takita, Wrood Kassira
{"title":"Revision Surgeries After Proton vs Photon Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy in Prepectoral Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction.","authors":"Anshumi Desai, Rohan Mangal, Carolina Padilla, Kate McClintock, Seraphina Choi, Juan R Mella-Catinchi, John C Oeltjen, Devinder P Singh, Cristiane Takita, Wrood Kassira","doi":"10.1093/asj/sjae216","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) improves disease-free survival in breast cancer but reduces aesthetic satisfaction. Proton PMRT has gained popularity because it results in fewer systemic complications. There is a lack of data regarding revision surgeries for prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PP-IBBR) following radiation.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>The aim of this study was to compare revision surgeries in PP-IBBR with photon vs proton PMRT.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A single-institution retrospective cohort study was performed that included breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and PP-IBBR with PMRT between January 2020 and October 2022. The mean follow-up duration for the cohort was 1056.4 days (2.89 years). Revision surgeries evaluated were fat grafting, conversion to autologous flaps, implant replacement, implant removal, capsulectomy, and scar revision.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 116 PP-IBBR subjects were divided into 2 cohorts, receiving either photon (75, 64.66%) or proton (41, 35.34%) radiation. Overall corrective surgeries were higher with photon therapy (27.5% overall; 32.4% photon vs 19.5% proton, P = .132). The odds of any revision surgery were nearly double with photon therapy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98), and the conversion to an autologous flap was significantly more likely with photon therapy (OR = 4.55, P = .025). Multivariable analysis showed an increased tendency for photon therapy patients to require any revision surgeries (OR = 1.62, P = .359), autologous flaps (OR = 5.97, P = .049), fat grafting (OR = 1.52, P = .664), and scar revision (OR = 4.51, P = .273).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Compared to proton therapy, traditional photon therapy has a higher conversion rate to autologous flaps with PP-IBBR. Photon therapy had higher rates of overall revision surgeries, but the difference was not statistically significant. Proton therapy is safer and requires fewer revision surgeries, warranting larger studies and broader utilization.</p><p><strong>Level of evidence: 3 (therapeutic): </strong></p>","PeriodicalId":7728,"journal":{"name":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","volume":" ","pages":"163-170"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aesthetic Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/asj/sjae216","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) improves disease-free survival in breast cancer but reduces aesthetic satisfaction. Proton PMRT has gained popularity because it results in fewer systemic complications. There is a lack of data regarding revision surgeries for prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PP-IBBR) following radiation.
Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare revision surgeries in PP-IBBR with photon vs proton PMRT.
Methods: A single-institution retrospective cohort study was performed that included breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy and PP-IBBR with PMRT between January 2020 and October 2022. The mean follow-up duration for the cohort was 1056.4 days (2.89 years). Revision surgeries evaluated were fat grafting, conversion to autologous flaps, implant replacement, implant removal, capsulectomy, and scar revision.
Results: The 116 PP-IBBR subjects were divided into 2 cohorts, receiving either photon (75, 64.66%) or proton (41, 35.34%) radiation. Overall corrective surgeries were higher with photon therapy (27.5% overall; 32.4% photon vs 19.5% proton, P = .132). The odds of any revision surgery were nearly double with photon therapy (odds ratio [OR] = 1.98), and the conversion to an autologous flap was significantly more likely with photon therapy (OR = 4.55, P = .025). Multivariable analysis showed an increased tendency for photon therapy patients to require any revision surgeries (OR = 1.62, P = .359), autologous flaps (OR = 5.97, P = .049), fat grafting (OR = 1.52, P = .664), and scar revision (OR = 4.51, P = .273).
Conclusions: Compared to proton therapy, traditional photon therapy has a higher conversion rate to autologous flaps with PP-IBBR. Photon therapy had higher rates of overall revision surgeries, but the difference was not statistically significant. Proton therapy is safer and requires fewer revision surgeries, warranting larger studies and broader utilization.
期刊介绍：
Aesthetic Surgery Journal is a peer-reviewed international journal focusing on scientific developments and clinical techniques in aesthetic surgery. The official publication of The Aesthetic Society, ASJ is also the official English-language journal of many major international societies of plastic, aesthetic and reconstructive surgery representing South America, Central America, Europe, Asia, and the Middle East. It is also the official journal of the British Association of Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons, the Canadian Society for Aesthetic Plastic Surgery and The Rhinoplasty Society.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
