Skip to main content
Log in

Clinical outcome of immediate breast reconstruction using a silicone gel-filled implant after nipple-preserving mastectomy

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In order to evaluate the safety of silicone gel-filled implants for breast reconstruction in terms of cancer control, we reviewed 122 patients with postoperative stage I and II breast cancer who were treated by nipple-preserving mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction using a silicone implant, and compared them with 92 controls treated by nipple-preserving mastectomy alone.

Twelve complications requiring surgical management occurred in the 122 reconstructions (9.8%). Two implants were replaced, and 10 implants were removed. These 10 cases were excluded from survival analysis. The mean follow-up duration was 78 months in the 112 patients with breast reconstruction, and 55 months in the controls. There were no significant differences in the overall, disease-free, and locoregional disease-free survival rates between the two groups. In the reconstruction group, recurrence occurred in 14 patients. Five of them had locoregional recurrence alone, and are surviving free of disease following local resection. By the last follow-up, there was no incidence of secondary cancer at any site, including the contralateral breast cancer or connective tissue disease in the both group.

Our results do not support the hypothesis of a detrimental effect of breast reconstruction using silicone gel-filled implants after mastectomy for breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CAF:

Cyclophosphamide, adriamycin, and 5-fluorouracil

References

  1. Deapen DM, Pike MC, Casagrande JT,et al: The relationship between breast cancer and augmentation mammaplasty; An epidemiologic study.Plast Reconstr Surg 77:361–368, 1986.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Sakanaka K: A study on modified radical mastectomy with preservation of the nipple-areolar complex for carcinoma of the breast; Criteria for preserving the nipple-areolar complex and one stage reconstruction of the breast.J Wakayama Med Soc 35:87- 98, 1984 (in Japanese with English summary).

    Google Scholar 

  3. Oura S: A clinical study of nipple preserved radical mastectomy; It’s safetiness in the preservation of nipple-areolar complex on breast cancer operation.J Wakayama Med Soc 45:525–536, 1994 (in Japanese with English summary).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Oura S, Sakurai T, Yoshimura G,et al: Clinical evaluation of the nipple-preserved mastectomy without radiotherapy for the breast cancers near the nipple-areolar complex.Jpn J Breast Cancer 9:111- 118, 1994 (in Japanese with English summary).

    Google Scholar 

  5. Oura S, Sakurai T, Yoshimura G,et al: Nipple- preserved mastectomy (Glt+Ax) as a standard operation for p-stage I and II breast cancer.J Jpn Surg Soc 95:887–892, 1994 (in Japanese with English summary).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Schain WS, Jacobs E, Wellisch DK,et al: Psychosocial issues in breast reconstruction; Intrapsychic, interpersonal, and practical concerns.Clin Plast Surg 11:237–242, 1984.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Hearing on protecting patients from the dangers of silicone breast implants. Human Resources and Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee, U.S. House of Representatives, December 18, 1990.

  8. Berkel H, Birdsell DC, Jenkins H,et al: Breast augmentation; A risk factor for breast cancer?N Engl J Med 326:1649–1653, 1992.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Deapen DM, Brody GS: Augmentation mammaplasty and breast cancer; A 5-year update of the Los Angels study.Plast Reconstr Surg 89:660–665, 1992.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Georgiade GS, Riefkohl R, Cox E,et al: Long-term clinical outcome of immediate reconstruction after mastectomy.Plast Reconstr Surg 76:415–420, 1985.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Petit JY, Le MG, Mouriesse H,et al: Can breast reconstruction with gel-filled silicone implants increase the risk of death and second primary cancer in patients treated by mastectomy for breast cancer?Plast Reconstr Surg 94:115–119, 1994.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Watts GT: Reconstruction of the breast as a primary and secondary procedure following mastectomy for carcinoma.Br J Surg 63:823–825, 1976.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gabriel SE, O’Fallon WM, Kurland LT,et al: Risk of connective-tissue diseases and other disorders after breast implantation.N Engl J Med 330:1697–1702, 1994.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Independent advisory committee on silicone gel filled breast implants; Summary of the report on silicone gel filled breast implants.Can Med Assoc J 147:1141- 1146, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Baker RR: The management of breast cancer with immediate or delayed reconstruction.Adv Surg 25:51–64, 1992.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

About this article

Cite this article

Yoshimura, G., Sakurai, T., Oura, S. et al. Clinical outcome of immediate breast reconstruction using a silicone gel-filled implant after nipple-preserving mastectomy. Breast Cancer 3, 47–52 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02966962

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02966962

Key words

Navigation