Locations:
Search IconSearch
October 22, 2018/Cancer/Research

Which Breast Reconstruction Technique Is Best for Patients Undergoing Post-Mastectomy Radiation Therapy?

10-year outcomes favor autologous over implant

rad-treatment_650x450

Radiation therapy and breast reconstruction after mastectomy don’t always go well together. Rates of infection, dehiscence, skin and/or flap necrosis, and hematoma are higher in patients that undergo reconstruction and have post-mastectomy radiation therapy. In those patients that have reconstruction with a tissue expander/implant (TE/I), radiation is associated with higher rates of implant extrusion, leak or capsular contracture, while those that have autologous reconstruction (AR) are at risk for hernias as well.

Advertisement

Cleveland Clinic is a non-profit academic medical center. Advertising on our site helps support our mission. We do not endorse non-Cleveland Clinic products or services. Policy

Toxicity profiles vary by technique and timing, and data currently available in the literature provide little guidance on determining the optimal treatment approach, says Chirag Shah, MD, Director of Clinical Research and Breast Radiation Oncology in Cleveland Clinic’s Department of Radiation Oncology.

In response, Dr. Shah and colleagues at Cleveland Clinic recently compared rates of complications in patients who had post-mastectomy radiation therapy both before and after AR or TE/I.

“We suspected that radiation to a TE/I, regardless of timing, would portend worse outcomes,” says Dr. Shah. “Our study confirmed this. For patients requiring radiation after mastectomy, AR was associated with fewer trips back to the operating room for complications and fewer reconstruction failures.”

Results of this study will be shared in an oral presentation at the 2018 ASTRO Annual Meeting in San Antonio.

Comparing techniques and timing

The study included 230 patients that had 233 breast reconstructions. The patients had either AR or TE/I, either before or after radiation therapy, between 2000 and 2008. Median follow-up was 7.6 years. Age, BMI, and rates of active smoking, diabetes and hypertension were similar among the groups. Reconstruction was performed at the time of mastectomy, before radiation therapy, in 81 percent of patients.

Overall, rates of reconstruction failure (resulting in converting to another reconstruction technique or a flat chest wall) and complications requiring re-operation were significantly higher with TE/I as compared to AR (Table).

Advertisement

On multivariate analysis, the most significant predictors of complications requiring re-operation were:

  • TE/I (Odds Ratio 2.4; P = 0.007).
  • BMI ≥ 30 (Odds Ratio 3.4; P = 0.002).
  • Active smoking (Odds Ratio 2.7; P = 0.002).

The only significant predictor of reconstruction failure was TE/I (Odds Ratio 5.4; P < 0.001).

However, the rate of failure was not significantly different between the four groups when wound infection was excluded (P = 0.156).

Most complications requiring re-operation occurred within the first two years following treatment, but reconstruction failure occurred up to 10 years after reconstruction.

Rethinking the paradigm

“Many patients undergoing mastectomy get expanders and/or implants whether or not they have radiation therapy,” says Dr. Shah. “We may need to rethink that paradigm.”

These findings indicate that radiation therapy in patients with AR results in fewer complications and reconstruction failures than radiation therapy in patients with TE/I. Yet risk of failure with TE/I can be reduced by minimizing risk of infection.

Radiation oncologists should discuss treatment options in a multidisciplinary, collaborative group with breast surgeons and plastic surgeons, ensuring plans are in place for managing reconstruction risks, says Dr. Shah.

Advertisement

Related Articles

Doctors working on MGUS screening study
March 18, 2024/Cancer/Research

Pilot Study Aims for Early Identification of Multiple Myeloma Precursor Among Black Patients

First-of-its-kind research investigates the viability of standard screening to reduce the burden of late-stage cancer diagnoses

Hematologist at Cleveland Clinic
March 14, 2024/Cancer/Blood Cancers

Advances in Mantle Cell Lymphoma Treatment (Podcast)

Global R&D efforts expanding first-line and relapse therapy options for patients

Physician with patient
March 6, 2024/Cancer/Research

Targeting Uncontrolled Erythrocytosis in Polycythemia Vera with Rusfertide

Study demonstrates ability to reduce patients’ reliance on phlebotomies to stabilize hematocrit levels

Dr. Jagadeesh at Cleveland Clinic
February 28, 2024/Cancer/Blood Cancers

Treating Patient with Systemic T-Cell Lymphoma and Graft-Versus-Host Disease

A case study on the value of access to novel therapies through clinical trials

Doctor measuring patient's waist size
February 26, 2024/Cancer/Research

Impact of Obesity on GVHD & Transplant Outcomes in Hematologic Malignancies

Findings highlight an association between obesity and an increased incidence of moderate-severe disease

Physician with patient
February 21, 2024/Cancer/Research

Strategies for Improving Clinical Trial Equity

Cleveland Clinic Cancer Institute takes multi-faceted approach to increasing clinical trial access 23456

How antibody drug conjugates work
February 13, 2024/Cancer/Research

Real-World Use of Trastuzumab Deruxtecan

Key learnings from DESTINY trials

CQD-4445459-rotz-650&#215;450
February 7, 2024/Cancer

Advances in Bone Marrow Transplant Have Improved Outcomes in Fanconi Anemia

Overall survival in patients treated since 2008 is nearly 20% higher than in earlier patients

Ad