Skip to main content
Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2023

Open Access 01.12.2023 | Research

Nipple-areolar complex (NAC) or skin flap ischemia necrosis post nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM)—analysis of clinicopathologic factors and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features

verfasst von: Hung-Wen Lai, Yi-Yuan Lee, Shou-Tung Chen, Chiung-Ying Liao, Tsung-Lin Tsai, Dar-Ren Chen, Yuan-Chieh Lai, Wen-Pin Kao, Wen-Pei Wu

Erschienen in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Ausgabe 1/2023

Abstract

Background

The purpose of this study is to identify clinicopathologic factors and/or preoperative MRI vascular patterns in the prediction of ischemia necrosis of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) or skin flap post nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM).

Methods

We performed a retrospective analysis of 441 NSM procedures from January 2011 to September 2021 from the breast cancer database at our institution. The ischemia necrosis of NAC or skin flap was evaluated in correlation with clinicopathologic factors and types of skin incision. Patients who received NSM with preoperative MRI evaluation were further evaluated for the relationship between vascular pattern and the impact on ischemia necrosis of NAC or skin flap.

Results

A total of 441 cases with NSM were enrolled in the current study, and the mean age of the cases was 49.1 ± 9.8 years old. A total of 41 (9.3%) NSM procedures were found to have NAC ischemia/necrosis. Risk factors were evaluated of which old age, large mastectomy specimen weight (> 450 g), and peri-areola incision were identified as predictors of NAC necrosis. Two-hundred seventy NSM procedures also received preoperative MRI, and the blood supply pattern was 18% single-vessel type and 82% double-vessel pattern. There were no correlations between MRI blood supply patterns or types of skin flap incisions with ischemia necrosis of NAC. There were also no correlations between blood loss and the pattern or size of the blood vessel.

Conclusion

Factors such as the type of skin incision, age, and size of mastectomy weight played an important role in determining ischemia necrosis of NAC; however, MRI vascular (single or dual vessel supply) pattern was not a significant predictive factor.
Hinweise

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s12957-023-02898-x.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Synopsis

Nipple-areola complex (NAC) or skin flap ischemia/necrosis is one of the major complications of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). This study aims to identify clinicopathologic risk factors or MRI features predictive of ischemia/necrosis of the NAC or skin flap. Old age, large mastectomy specimen weight (> 450 g), and peri-areola incision were identified as known risk factors for NAC ischemia/necrosis. There were however no correlations between MRI blood supply pattern, skin incision placement, blood loss, or size of blood vessel with ischemia necrosis of NAC.

Introduction

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has gradually become one of the standard surgical treatment options for breast cancer patients indicated for mastectomy without apparent nipple-areolar complex (NAC) involvement due to its better cosmetic results and acceptable oncologic outcome [16]. Studies have shown that preserving NAC did not significantly increase the risk of local recurrence compared to skin-sparing mastectomy, and oncologic safety is comparable to traditional mastectomy [710].
To reduce locoregional recurrence, NSM techniques involve the removal of glandular and ductal tissue from beneath the NAC, which may affect NAC vascularity and result in NAC ischemia or necrosis. NAC or skin flap ischemia/necrosis is one of the important complications of NSM [1114] with the incidence rate varying from 12.2 to 64.1% as it may result in suboptimal esthetic results and increased patients’ anxiety [15]. According to a recent meta-analysis, partial or complete nipple necrosis occurred in around 15% of patients who received NSM, which accounts for the majority of overall complications [16]. Risk factors of ischemia/necrosis of the NAC were identified from some studies [1721], which included body mass index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m2, diabetes, heavy smoking, breast sagging, use of steroids, personal medical history, massive removal of breast tissue, and type of incisions. With the improved knowledge of ischemia necrosis of NAC and refinement of surgical technique of NSM, NAC ischemia/necrosis events had decreased, but it still remained an important complication to avoid at all costs, if possible.
Rusby et al. [22] suggested that the type of incision will affect the risk of NAC necrosis, and incisions around the areola had a higher risk than incisions placed further away from the areolar. Bahl et al. [23] proposed that the pattern of blood supply as shown on preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) could be predictive of the risk of postoperative ischemia necrosis of NAC. A double blood vessel supply has been shown to reduce the risk of ischemic necrosis of NAC. In contrast to types of skin incision, which had been confirmed from previous evidence [11, 2427], studies looking at preoperative MRI blood vessel pattern as a predictive factor of NAC ischemia necrosis [23] were lacking.
The aim of the current study is to identify and validate the potential risk factors of NAC and/or skin flap ischemia necrosis, such as wound incision type, BMI, and breast size. The findings of preoperative breast MRI vascular pattern (single versus double vessel supply) would also be analyzed to assess for any correlations with NAC ischemia necrosis.

Materials and methods

Patient selection and data collection

To evaluate and validate the potential risk factors associated with NAC ischemia necrosis, patients who underwent NSM from January 2011 to September 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained breast cancer database at Changhua Christian Hospital (CCH), a tertiary medical center in Central Taiwan. Those patients whose clinicopathologic factors, information regarding the types of skin incision, postoperative NAC, or skin flap ischemia necrosis status could not be clearly identified were excluded from this study.
The collected data was obtained from the medical records of these patients, including age, BMI, pathologic reports, complications, ischemia necrosis of the NAC or skin flap, the location of the surgical incision, and status of follow-up. Patients with preoperative breast MRI were further analyzed in terms of the pattern of blood supply (single vessel or double vessel) of the breast and the diameter of the vessel. The pattern of blood supply and diameter of the blood vessel was correlated with ischemia necrosis of NAC or skin flap condition to determine if these factors were predictive of NAC or skin flap necrosis. Combined blood supply pattern (single versus double vessel) in different types of skin incisions was also assessed to ascertain its impact on ischemia necrosis of NAC. A literature review of reported studies [12, 19, 20, 23, 2535] regarding risk factors and incidence of NAC ischemia necrosis was also performed in this study.
According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 441 NSM procedures were identified and enrolled in the current study, and among them, 270 cases had preoperative breast MRI. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the CCH (CCH IRB no. 141224 & 201242), and all patients consented to the study. The study design and patients’ flow chart were shown in Fig. 1.

Grading of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) ischemia and necrosis

In this study, nipple ischemia necrosis was divided into 4 grades, designated as grades 0, 1, 2, and 3 (Fig. 2). In grade 0 NAC ischemia/necrosis, the nipple is normal; there is no necrosis of NAC at all. Grade 1 NAC ischemia referred to transient ischemia injury with slightly ischemic change, which was reversible after conservative treatment. There would be minimal (< 25%) to no nipple volume loss after recovery. Grade 2 NAC ischemia necrosis referred to irreversible moderate ischemia necrosis, which eventually leads to a loss of around 50% (25–75%) of the original volume. Grade 3 NAC ischemia necrosis was the most severe form of necrosis injury. The NAC suffered from near (> 75%) to complete (100%) loss of volume and eventually leading to surgical excision or total loss of the NAC tissue.
To evaluate the risk factors associated with NAC ischemia necrosis, those patients who suffered from grade 2 or grade 3 NAC ischemia necrosis (Fig 2) were recorded as events of NAC necrosis in the current study.

Type of skin flap incisions

NSMs were performed via various skin incisions. Skin incisions were divided into the following categories for analytic purposes: upper outer incision (radial incision), the peri-areolar-related incision (with or without axillary incision), single axillary incision, and infra-mammary + axillary incisions (Supplementary File 1). In our study, the NSM procedures with single axillary incision were performed with endoscopic-assisted or robotic-assisted NSMs [36].

Body mass index (BMI) category

BMI was calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared (BMI = kg/m2). Using the Taiwanese definition, BMI was categorized into four groups: underweight (BMI < 18.5), normal (BMI of 18.5 to 24), overweight (BMI of 24.1 to 26.9), and obese (BMI ≥ 27). Patients were further categorized into 2 groups, which included non-obese (BMI < 27) and obese (BMI ≥ 27), for analytic purposes in the current study.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and protocol

MR imaging was performed with a Siemens MAGNETOM Verio 3.0 Tesla MRI machine. All patients were imaged in the prone position with both breasts placed into a dedicated 16-channel breast coil. MR imaging protocols included the following: bilateral axial turbo-spin-echo fat-suppressed T2-weighted imaging (TR/TE 4630/70 ms; field of view 320 mm; slice thickness 3 mm; number of excitations 1), axial turbo-spin-echo T1-weighted imaging (TR/TE 736/9.1 ms; field of view 320 mm; slice thickness 3 mm; number of excitations 1), and diffusion-weighted imaging (TR/TE 5800/82 ms; field of view 360 mm; slice thickness 3 mm, with b-values of 0, 400, and 800 s/mm2). Dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images (DCE-MRI) were obtained with a three-dimensional fat-suppressed volumetric interpolated breath-hold examination (VIBE) sequence with parallel acquisition once before and five times after a bolus injection of gadobenate dimeglumine (0.1 mmol/kg). Both breasts were examined in the transverse plane at 60 s intervals in each phase of the dynamic studies. The dynamic MRI parameters were as follows: TR/TE 4.36/1.58 ms, field of view 320 mm, and slice thickness 1 mm. The whole breast MRI readings were carried out by two experienced, board-certified breast radiologists (WPW and CYL).
Breast MRI had been part of preoperative evaluation for breast cancer patients diagnosed and treated at CCH. Patients who underwent preoperative breast MRI were retrospectively evaluated with regard to blood flow pattern. To understand the distribution and blood supply of blood vessels around the areola, MRI is used, and the blood supply pattern is divided into the dual blood supply and single blood supply. The diameter of the blood vessel was also divided into less than 1 mm, equal to 1 mm, and greater than 1 mm. The interpretation of blood vessel type and pattern was done by an experienced breast imaging radiologist (WPW) with more than 10 year’s experience in breast MRI imaging.

Statistical analysis

Data are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and compared using the parametric two-sample t-test. Baseline data were analyzed using chi-square tests (categorical data) or Student’s t-test (continuous data). Associations between nipple ischemia necrosis and risk factors of patients were analyzed using the chi-square test. Multivariate logistics was performed to assess the association between NAC and/or skin flap ischemia necrosis and risk factors. Results were considered statistically significant if the two-tailed p-value was < 0.05 for all tests. Statistical analyses were performed using SAS 9.4 version (SAS Inc., Cary, NC, USA) by a statistician (YYL).

Results

According to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a total of 441 NSM procedures were enrolled in the current study. The mean age was 49.1 ± 9.8 years old, and breast reconstructions were performed in 83.7% (369/441). Among the 369 NSM cases with breast reconstructions, 321 received gel implants, 9 tissue expanders, 33 TRAM flaps, 4 LD flaps, and 2 LD flaps + implants. Types of skin incisions (Supplementary File 1) were 83 (18.9%) upper outer oblique (radial) incisions, 107 (24.3%) peri-areolar-related incisions, 243 (55.2%) single axillary incisions, and 7 (1.6%) infra-mammary + axillary incisions. Among these 441 NSM procedures, NAC ischemia necrosis grading was 84.1% (371/441) grade 0, 6.6% (29/441) grade 1, 8.4% (37/441) grade 2, and 0.9% (4/441) grade 3 (Table 1, Fig. 2). According to NAC ischemia necrosis criteria used in the current study, about 9.3% (41/441) of NSM procedures were graded as having NAC necrosis events. The demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients were summarized in Table 1.
Table 1
Clinicopathologic manifestations of 441 nipple-sparing mastectomy procedures enrolled in current study
n = 441
Mean (sd), n (%)
Age, y
49.1 ± 9.8
BMI
 < 27
384 (87.1)
 ≥ 27
57 (12.9)
Location
 Left
219 (49.7)
 Right
222 (50.3)
Surgery type
 Convention
106 (24.0)
 Endoscopy
242 (54.9)
 Robot
93 (21.1)
Reconstruction
 Yes
369 (83.7)
 No
72 (16.3)
Reconstruction method (n = 369)
 Tissue expander
9 (2.4)
 Gel implant
321 (87.0)
 TRAM flap
33 (8.9)
 LD flap + gel implant
2 (0.5)
 LD flap
4 (1.1)
Type of skin incisions (N/A = 1)
 Upper outer oblique incisions
83 (18.9)
 Peri-areolar incisions
107 (24.3)
 Single axillary incisions
243 (55.2)
 Infra-mammary + axillary incisions
7 (1.6)
Pathology tumor size, cm
2.6 ± 2.3
Grade (N/A = 102)
 I
65 (19.2)
 II
204 (60.2)
 III
70 (20.6)
Clinical stage (N/A = 132)
 0
76 (24.6)
 I
59 (19.1)
 II
161 (52.1)
 III
13 (4.2)
Subtype (N/A = 113)
 Luminal A
152 (46.3)
 Luminal B1
81 (24.7)
 Luminal B2
40 (12.2)
 HER-2 (+)
26 (7.9)
 TNBC
29 (8.8)
Lymph node stage (N/A = 61)
 N0
271 (71.3)
 N1
84 (22.1)
 N2
22 (5.8)
 N3
3 (0.8)
Surgical ALN staging method (N/A = 129)
 ALND
24 (6.4)
 SLNB
281 (74.7)
 SLNB+ALND
71 (18.9)
Lymph node metastasis (N/A = 61)
 Yes
109 (28.8)
 No
270 (71.2)
Stage (N/A = 80)
 0
82 (22.7)
 I
95 (26.3)
 II
151 (41.8)
 III
33 (9.1)
ER (N/A = 86)
 Positive
289 (81.4)
 Negative
66 (18.6)
PR (N/A = 89)
 Positive
246 (69.9)
 Negative
106 (30.1)
HER-2 (N/A = 134)
 Positive
83 (27.0)
 Negative
224 (73.0)
Ki-67 (%) (N/A = 181)
 ≦ 14
103 (39.6)
 > 14
157 (60.4)
Pathology (N/A = 11)
 DCIS
85 (19.8)
 IDC
239 (55.6)
 ILC
14 (3.3)
 LCIS
4 (0.9)
 Other
88 (20.5)
NAC ischemia necrosis
 0
371 (84.1)
 1
29 (6.6)
 2
37 (8.4)
 3
4 (0.9)
Skin flap necrosis
 0
417 (94.6)
 1
22 (5.0)
 2
2 (0.5)
BMI Body mass index, TRAM flap Transverse rectus abdominal myocutaneous flap, LD flap Latissimus dorsi flap, ALN Axillary lymph node, ALND Axillary lymph node dissection, SLNB Sentinel lymph node biopsy, NAC Nipple areolar complex
Risk factors associated with NAC necrosis were evaluated, and the mean age of patients with NAC necrosis was 53 ± 10.7 years old compared with patients without NAC necrosis (48.7 ± 9.6), which tend to be older (p < 0.01). Patients with specimen weights of more than 450 g had a higher incidence of NAC ischemia necrosis (16.9%, 14/83) than those (4.3%, 3/70) with less than 180 grams (p = 0.03, Table 2). In terms of skin incision analysis, patients with peri-areola incisions had a higher incidence of nipple necrosis (19.6%, 21/107) compared to patients with single axillary incision (6.2%, 15/243) or upper outer oblique (radial) incision (6%, 5/83, p-value < 0.01). Similar findings were also observed in NAC or skin necrosis, which showed that older age, larger specimen weight, and wound incision type were significant risk factors. Single axillary incision (7.4%) was associated with lower NAC or skin flap necrosis than upper oblique (radial) incision (14.4%) or per-areolar incision (22.4%, p < 0.01). Factors related to ischemia necrosis of NAC and/or skin flap were summarized in Table 2.
Table 2
Factors associated with nipple-areolar complex (NAC) and skin necrosis
Characteristics
 
Nipple-areola complex
Ischemia necrosis
Nipple-areola complex
Ischemia necrosis or skin flap necrosis
Total (n = 441)
Yes (n = 41)
No (n =4 00)
p-value
Yes (n = 54)
No (n = 387)
p-value
Age
49.1 ± 9.8
53 ± 10.7
48.7 ± 9.6
< 0.01
51.2 ± 10.7
48.8 ± 9.6
0.09
BMI
23 ± 3.5
23.9 ± 4.3
23.0 ± 3.4
0.16
23.9 ± 4.1
22.9 ± 3.4
0.09
BMI
   
0.19
  
0.08
 BMI < 27
384 (87.1)
33 (80.5)
351 (87.8)
 
43 (11.2)
341 (88.8)
 
 BMI ≥ 27
57 (12.9)
8 (19.5)
49 (12.3)
 
11 (19.3)
46 (80.7)
 
Reconstruction
   
0.10
  
0.02
 Yes
369 (83.7)
38 (92.7)
331 (82.8)
 
51 (94.4)
318 (82.2)
 
 No
72 (16.3)
3 (7.3)
69 (17.3)
 
3 (5.6)
69 (17.8)
 
Reconstruction type
   
0.62
  
0.57
 Tissue expander
9 (2.4)
0 (0.0)
9 (2.7)
 
0(0.0)
9 (2.83)
 
 Gel implant
321 (87.0)
36 (94.7)
285 (86.1)
 
45 (88.24)
276 (86.79)
 
 TRAM Flap
33 (8.9)
2 (5.3)
31 (9.4)
 
6 (11.76)
27 (8.49)
 
 LD flap + gel implant
2 (0.5)
(0.0)
2 (0.6)
 
0 (0.0)
2 (0.63)
 
 LD flap
4 (1.1)
(0.0)
4 (1.2)
 
0 (0.0)
4 (1.26)
 
Specimen
337.6 ± 207.3
427.2 ± 235.5
328.2 ± 202.2
< 0.01
432.8 ± 224.1
324.0 ± 201.5
< 0.01
Specimen
   
0.03
  
< 0.01
 < 180
70 (16.2)
3 (7.3)
67 (17.1)
 
3 (5.6)
67 (17.7)
 
 180–320
174 (40.3)
12 (29.3)
162 (41.4)
 
16 (29.6)
158 (41.8)
 
 320–450
105 (24.3)
12 (29.3)
93 (23.8)
 
15 (27.8)
90 (23.8)
 
 > 450
83 (19.2)
14 (34.1)
69 (17.6)
 
20 (37.0)
63 (16.7)
 
Tumor-nipple distance
3.2 ± 1.8
3.4 ± 1.6
3.1 ± 1.8
0.41
3.7 ± 1.7
3.1 ± 1.8
0.04
Neoadjuvant CT
   
0.04
  
0.13
 Yes
46 (15.2)
1 (3.0)
45 (16.7)
 
3 (7.3)
43 (16.5)
 
 No
256 (84.8)
32 (97.0)
224 (83.3)
 
38 (92.7)
218 (83.5)
 
ER
   
0.62
  
0.78
 Positive
289 (81.4)
29 (78.4)
260 (81.8)
 
40 (80.0)
209 (69.2)
 
 Negative
66 (18.6)
8 (21.6)
58 (18.2)
 
10 (20.0)
93 (30.8)
 
PR
   
0.96
  
0.49
 Positive
246 (69.9)
26 (70.3)
220 (69.8)
 
37 (74.0)
219 (85.0)
 
 Negative
106 (30.1)
11 (29.7)
95 (30.2)
 
13 (26.0)
93 (87.7)
 
HER-2
   
0.94
  
0.84
 Positive
83 (27)
9 (26.5)
74 (27.1)
 
13 (28.3)
70 (26.8)
 
 Negative
224 (73)
25 (73.5)
199 (72.9)
 
33 (71.7)
191 (73.2)
 
Stage
   
0.58
  
0.28
 Stage 0
82 (22.7)
8 (20.5)
74 (23)
 
9 (17.3)
73 (23.6)
 
 Stage 1
95 (26.3)
9 (23.1)
86 (26.7)
 
12 (23.1)
83 (26.9)
 
 Stage 2
151 (41.8)
20 (51.3)
131 (40.7)
 
28 (18.5)
123 (39.8)
 
 Stage 3
33 (9.1)
2 (5.1)
31 (9.6)
 
28 (53.8)
30 (9.7)
 
Skin incision
   
< 0.01
  
< 0.01
 Upper outer oblique (radial)
83 (18.9)
5 (12.2)
78 (19.5)
 
12 (22.2)
71 (18.4)
 
 Peri-areolar
107 (24.3)
21 (51.2)
86 (21.6)
 
24 (44.4)
83 (21.5)
 
 Single axillary
243 (55.2)
15 (36.6)
228 (57.1)
 
18 (33.3)
225 (58.3)
 
 Infra-mammary + axillary
7 (1.6)
0 (0.0)
7 (1.8)
 
0 (0.0)
7 (1.8)
 
The related risk factors associated with ischemia necrosis of NAC and/or skin flap were further analyzed with univariate and multivariate logistic regression (Table 3). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, compared to the upper outer (radial) incision, the peri-areolar-related incision was significantly associated with higher NAC ischemia necrosis (odd ratio = 5.33, p < 0.01). Increasing age was associated with a higher risk of NAC ischemia necrosis (odds ratio = 1.04, p = 0.02). Compared with small breast (mastectomy specimen weight < 180 g), larger breast (mastectomy specimen weight > 450 g) was significantly associated with a higher risk of NAC ischemia necrosis (odds ratio = 4.6, p = 0.03) or NAC-or-skin flap necrosis (odds ratio = 6.99, p < 0.01, Table 3).
Table 3
Association between nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis and risk factors by the logistic regression (n = 441)
Univariate logistic regression
 
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis or skin flap necrosis
 
Odds ratio
95% CI
p-value
Odds ratio
95% CI
p-value
Skin incision
 Upper outer oblique
1
-
-
1
-
-
 Peri-areolar
3.81
1.42–10.98
< 0.01
1.71
0.80–3.67
0.17
 Single axillary
1.03
0.36–2.92
0.96
0.47
0.22–1.03
0.06
 Infra-mammary + axillary
-
-
0.99
-
-
0.99
Age
1.04
1.01–1.07
0.01
1.02
1.00–1.05
0.10
Specimen
      
 < 180
1
-
-
1
-
-
 180–320
1.63
0.44–5.95
0.46
2.22
0.63–7.89
0.22
 320–450
2.89
0.78–10.68
0.11
3.74
1.04–13.44
0.04
 > 450
4.46
1.23–16.24
0.02
6.99
1.98–24.70
< 0.01
Multivariate logistic regression
 
Odds ratio
95% CI
p-value
Odds ratio
95% CI
p-value
Skin incision
 Upper outer oblique
1
-
-
1
-
-
 Peri-areolar
5.33
1.81–15.67
< 0.01
2.30
1.02–5.17
0.04
 Single axillary
1.22
0.41–3.60
0.72
0.56
0.25–1.26
0.16
 Infra-mammary + axillary
-
-
0.99
   
Age
1.04
1.01–1.08
0.02
1.02
0.99–1.05
0.21
Specimen
 < 180
1
-
-
1
-
-
 180–320
1.36
0.36–5.22
0.65
2.15
0.59–7.86
0.25
 320–450
2.28
0.58–8.89
0.24
3.45
0.92–12.910
0.07
 > 450
4.60
1.20–17.71
0.03
6.99
1.91–25.64
< 0.01
Of the 441 NSM patients, 270 had received preoperative MRI evaluation. Among these patients, the blood supply pattern was 18% (47/261) with single vessel blood supply and 82% (214/261) with double blood vessel supply (Fig 3). The blood vessel diameter was > 1 mm in 61.7% (161/261), 1 mm in 17.2% (45/261), and < 1 mm in 21.1% (55/261) of patients with preoperative MRI. In these 270 NSM procedures, NAC ischemia necrosis was found in 9.6% (26/270) of NSM procedures.
In patients who received preoperative breast MRI evaluation, the incidence of NAC necrosis in single blood vessel pattern was 4.3% (2/47) and 10.8% (23/214) in double blood vessel cases (p-value = 0.17, Table 4). The incidence of NAC necrosis was 17.8% (8/45) in vessel diameter of 1 mm, 9.9% (16/161) in > 1 mm diameter, and 1.8% (1/55) in vessel < 1 mm (p = 0.03). In these 270 cohorts of patients, skin incision type remained an important factor related to NAC necrosis, with 4.6% (3/66) in the upper outer quadrant (radial) incision group, 23% (17/74) in the peri-areolar related incision, and 4.8% (6/126) in single axillary incision (p < 0.01).
Table 4
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis and/or skin flap necrosis in patients with preoperative breast MRI
Characteristics
Total (n = 270)
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis or skin flap necrosis
Yes (n = 26)
No (n = 244)
p-value
Yes (n = 35)
No (n = 235)
p-value
Skin incision
   
< 0.01
  
< 0.01
 Upper outer oblique (radial)
66 (24.4)
3 (11.5)
63 (25.8)
 
6 (9.1)
60 (90.9)
 
 Peri-areolar
74 (27.4)
17 (65.4)
57 (23.4)
 
20 (27.0)
54 (73.0)
 
 Single axillary
126 (46.7)
6 (23.1)
120 (49.2)
 
9 (7.1)
117 (92.9)
 
 Infra-mammary + axillary
4 (1.5)
0 (0.0)
4 (1.6)
 
0 (0.0)
4 (100.0)
 
Blood supply (NA = 9)
   
0.17
  
0.35
 Single
47 (18.0)
2 (8.0)
45 (19.1)
 
4 (12.1)
43 (18.9)
 
 Dual
214 (82.0)
23 (92.0)
191 (80.9)
 
29 (87.9)
185 (81.1)
 
Blood supply (upper outer oblique)
   
0.42
  
0.58
 Single
11 (16.9)
0 (0.0)
11 (17.7)
 
0 (0.0)
11 (18.6)
 
 Dual
54 (83.1)
3 (100.0)
51(82.3)
 
6 (100.0)
48 (81.4)
 
Blood supply (peri-areolar)
   
0.13
  
0.15
 Single
21 (28.8)
2 (9.5)
19 (90.5)
 
3 (15.8)
18 (33.3)
 
 Dual
52 (71.2)
14 (26.9)
51 (82.3)
 
16 (84.2)
36 (66.7)
 
Blood supply (single axillary)
   
1
  
1
 Single
15 (12.6)
0 (0.0)
15 (13.3)
 
1 (12.5)
14 (12.6)
 
 Dual
104 (87.4)
6 (100.0)
98 (86.7)
 
7 (87.5)
97 (87.4)
 
Blood supply (infra-mammary + axillary)
   
-
  
-
 Single
0 (0.0)
0
0 (0.0)
 
0
0 (0.0)
 
 Dual
4 (100.0%)
0
4 (100.0)
 
0
4 (100.0)
 
Blood diameter (NA = 9)
   
0.03
  
0.15
 < 1 mm
55 (21.1)
1 (4.0)
54 (22.9)
 
3 (9.1)
52 (22.8)
 
 = 1 mm
45 (17.2)
8 (32.0)
37 (15.7)
 
8 (24.2)
37 (16.2)
 
 > 1 mm
161 (61.7)
16 (64.0)
145 (61.4)
 
22 (66.7)
139 (61.0)
 
Analyze the correlation between MRI vascular pattern and nipple-areola necrosis
 
Nipple-areola complex ischemia necrosis
p-value
 
Total (n = 261)
0 (n = 218)
1 (n = 18)
2 (n = 22)
3 (n = 3)
 
Blood supply
     
0.19
 Single
47 (18.0)
39 (17.9)
6 (33.3)
2 (9.1)
0 (0.0)
 
 Dual
214 (82.0)
179 (82.1)
12 (66.7)
20 (90.9)
3 (100.0)
 
Blood diameter
     
0.25
 < 1
55 (21.1)
51 (23.4)
3 (16.7)
1 (4.5)
0 (0.0)
 
 = 1
45 (17.2)
34 (15.6)
3 (16.7)
7 (31.8)
1 (33.3)
 
 > 1
161 (61.7)
133 (61.0)
12 (66.7)
14 (63.6)
2 (66.7)
 
Total 261 patients, excluding NAC ischemia grade 0 = 218
Excluding 2 cases whose detailed information could not be traced
Analyze the correlation between MRI vascular patterns and blood loss
 
Blood supply
p-value
 
Total (n = 249)
Single (n = 44)
Dual (n = 205)
0.49
Blood loss total
94.3 ± 80.1
101.9 ± 77.7
92.7 ± 80.7
 
 
Blood diameter
 
 
Total (n = 249)
< 1 (n = 52)
= 1 (n = 41)
> 1 (n = 156)
 
Blood loss total
94.3 ± 80.1
81.1 ± 67.0
112.2 ± 100.3
94.0 ± 77.8
0.18
The blood supply pattern (single or dual blood supply) or blood vessel diameter was not related to NAC ischemia necrosis grading (Table 4). Combining skin incision type and pattern of the blood vessel, there was no difference in NAC ischemia necrosis risk by either single or double vessel pattern in each type of skin incision (Table 4). Correlations between the pattern or size of the blood vessel with blood loss were also investigated, but there were no correlations found (single versus double, p = 0.49) or size of the blood vessel (< 1 mm, = 1 mm, or > 1 mm, p = 0.18, Table 4).
A literature review of clinicopathologic risk factors or imaging factors predictive of NAC ischemia necrosis was performed [12, 19, 20, 23, 2535] and summarized in Table 5, which supported findings derived from the current study.
Table 5
Literature review of nipple-areolar complex ischemia necrosis rate and risk factors
Reference
Journal
Publish year
Number
Ischemia(%)
Total necrosis
Risk factor of NAC necrosis
Komorowski et al. [28]
World J Surg
2006
38
5 (13.2%)
3 (7.9%)
Old age (> 45)
Garwood et al. [29]
Ann Surg
2009
64
19 (30%)
N/a
Autologous reconstruction, incision type
   
106
14 (13%)
N/a
 
Spear et al. [33]
Plast Reconstr Surg
2011
43
N/A
6 (14.0%)
 
Algaithy et al. [30]
Eur J Surg Oncol
2012
50
13 (26.0%)
0
Smoking, young age (< 45), incision type, thin areolar flap (< 5 mm)
Carlson et al. [12]
Breast J
2014
71
20 (28.2%)
N/A
Incision site (peri-areolar), operation for cancer (requires additional subareolar excision and frozen section to exclude disease)
Chirappapha et al. [31]
Plast Reconstr Surg Global Open
2014
124
19 (15.3%)
4 (3.5%)
Volume of breast removed
Colwell et al. [32]
Plast Reconstr Surg
2014
482
N/A
21 (4.4%)
Preoperative radiotherapy, implant volume for direct-to-implant, incision type
Bertoni et al. [34]
Ann Surg Oncol
2016
28
N/A
2 (7.1%)
 
Bahl et al. [23]
J Am Coll Surg
2016
164
20 (12.2%)
7 (4.27%)
Single blood supply to the breast on MRI
Ahn et al. [11]
Eur J Surg Oncol
2018
220
141 (64.1%)
25 (11.4%)
Age, BMI, existence of ptosis, incision site (peri-areolar), reconstruction
Odom et al. [20]
Plast Reconstr Surg
2018
79
21 (26.5%)
16 (20.2%)
Long operative time, lower whole breast fluorescent intensity, smoking, lower Karnofsky Performance Scale
Daar et al. [25]
Plast Reconstr Surg
2019
4645a (30 studies)
4.62%
2.49%
Incision site (peri-areolar)
Agha et al. [16]
BJS Open
2019
3015a (14 studies)
15.0%
N/a
 
Kontos et al. [26]
J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
2020
30
4 (13.3%)
N/A
 
Park et al. [35]
Breast
2020
290
45 (15.5%)
25 (8.6%)
Incision site (peri-areolar), decreased tumor-nipple distance, increased breast weight
Webb et al. [19]
Am J Surg
2020
294
105 (35.7%)
0
Increased body mass index
Houvenaeghel et al. [27]
Br J Surg
2021
59
9 (15.0%)
2 (3.0%)
Body weight, body mass index
Lai et al.
Current study
Present
441
Grade 1
29 (6.6%)
Grade 2
37 (8.4%)
Grade 3
4 (0.9%)
Age, incision type (peri-areolar), larger breast (specimen > 450 g)
MRI: Single or dual blood supply not risk factor for NAC necrosis
aMeta-analysis

Discussion

In the current study, we enrolled 441 NSM procedures with NAC ischemia necrosis grading, clinicopathologic, and MR imaging characteristics to identify risk factors for NAC and/or skin flap necrosis. We found that age, type of skin incision, and larger breast (mastectomy specimen weight) were important risk factors for NAC and/or skin flap necrosis. However, the MRI pattern of blood supply was not a risk factor nor had any correlations with ischemia necrosis of NAC in this study.
Reported studies [12, 25, 30, 35] (Table 5) had shown that the type of skin incisions played important role in the risk of NAC ischemia necrosis. In the current study, the overall NAC ischemia necrosis rate was 9.3%, which included 8.4% partial necrosis (grade2), and 0.9% total necrosis (grade 3, Table 1, Fig. 2) cases. The NAC ischemia necrosis rate was about 6% in the upper outer oblique (radial) incision, 19.6% in the peri-areolar-related incision, and 6.2% in single axillary incision (p < 0.01, Table 2). Park et al. [35] had compared three different (inframammary folds (IMF), radial, and peri-areola) incisions of NSM, and the rates of NAC ischemia or necrosis were significantly different. Compared with IMF incisions, the incidence of NAC necrosis in peri-areola incisions is higher. Our findings supported that incision located far away from the areola would decrease the risk of NAC ischemia necrosis [22, 25, 37].
When skin flap or NAC ischemia necrosis was taken as a postoperative event, the single axillary incision (7.4%) was associated with lower NAC or skin flap necrosis than the upper oblique (radial) incision (14.4%) or the per-areolar incision (22.4%, p < 0.01, Table 2). As shown in Supplementary File 1, the single axillary incision could prevent disruption of vascular supply to the NAC or skin flap, and the risk of NAC or skin flap ischemia necrosis was expectedly lower (Tables 2 and 3). In the current study, the single axillary incision NSMs were performed with either endoscopic or robotic assistance which were collectively classified as minimal access NSM [36].
Studies have reported that BMI is one of the risk factors (Table 5) for nipple and areola necrosis [38]. BMI is an index of obesity and is highly correlated with breast mastectomy specimen weight. In our previous study [39], we showed that higher BMI women had larger mastectomy specimen weight. In the current study, patients with specimen weights of more than 450 g have a higher (16.9%) incidence of NAC ischemia necrosis than those with less than 180 g specimen weight (4.3%, odds ratio = 4.6, p = 0.03, Table 3). Some studies suggested that the increase in BMI will increase the operation time of NSM, thereby increasing the possibility of nipple necrosis [19, 40, 41]. In the current study, BMI ≥ 27 was associated with a trend of increased NAC or skin flap necrosis rate (19.3%) compared with patients whose BMI was < 27 (11.2%, p = 0.08). Some studies also reported that the surgeon’s experience will affect the incidence of NAC necrosis, and surgical delay [34, 42], in which the sub-nipple tissue and skin flap were divided with delayed NSM 2 weeks later would also decrease the risk of NAC ischemia necrosis.
Breast MRI had been one of the important imaging evaluation tools for preoperative breast cancer patients [39, 4345]. Blood supply of the NAC could be predictive of NAC necrosis after surgery [23]. In a previously reported study [23], patients with MRI features of a single blood vessel pattern had a higher risk of NAC necrosis than a double blood vessel. However, in the current study, we did not observe a difference in NAC ischemia necrosis rate between patients with single or double vessel supply as determined by preoperative breast MRI (Table 4).
However, the authors found that blood vessel diameter was related to ischemia necrosis of NAC. The NAC ischemia necrosis rate was highest in the MRI vessel diameter of 1 mm (17.8%), followed by 9.9% in the vessel > 1 mm diameter and lowest (1.8%) in the vessel < 1 mm (Table 4). We further analyzed the impact of single or dual blood vessel supply to different types of skin incisions and found no difference in blood vessel pattern to the rate of NAC necrosis in either type of skin flap incisions (Table 4). Whether preoperative breast MRI blood vessel pattern could be informative or predictive for NAC ischemia necrosis [23] remained unclear due to rare and inconsistent results.
Our current study is limited by its retrospective nature and the small number of NSM procedures analyzed which could lead to bias in outcomes interpretation. The skills and experience of surgeons could also affect the risk of NAC necrosis [11]; in the current study, most of the NSM procedures were performed by the principal investigator (HWL), which could exclude surgeon-related bias. Braun et al. [46] reported that after NSM, breast reconstruction methods also affect the necrosis rate of NAC; however, in the current study, we did not find breast reconstruction as a risk factor. Despite these limitations, our studies enrolled 441 NSM procedures with detailed clinicopathologic factors and validated postoperative skin flap or NAC survival status to evaluate risk factors for NAC or skin flap necrosis. We also have 270 patients with preoperative breast MRI to validate the implication of MRI vessel pattern on NAC ischemia necrosis post-NSM. Therefore, the results and information derived from the current study are valuable.

Conclusion

This retrospective study examined both clinical and imaging risk factors for NAC necrosis. Our current study ascertained that certain risk factors, like the type of skin flap (peri-areolar) incisions, age, larger breast (mastectomy specimen weight > 450 g), played an important role in ischemic necrosis of NAC or skin flap in patients post NSM. Avoiding peri-areolar incision and appropriate patient selection such as younger age, BMI < 27, and the vessel < 1 mm on preoperative breast MRI may greatly decrease the risk of NAC necrosis. We did not find the pattern of blood vessels (single versus double) around the NAC to be related to ischemia necrosis of the NAC. Larger retrospective or future prospective studies are needed to validate this hypothesis.

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Chin-Mei Tai, Yi-Ru Ke, Yun-Ting Chang, Shu-Hsin Pai, An-Ting Yeh, and Ya-Ting Zhung for their assistance in this study and Chi-Wei Mok for English editing of the manuscript.

Declarations

This retrospective study “Nipple areolar complex (NAC) or skin flap ischemia necrosis post nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM)-Analysis of clinicopathologic and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) factors” was approved by the Institutional Review Board of the Changhua Christian Hospital (CCH IRB No. 141224 & 201242), and all participating patients had signed the related informed consent.
All the individual person’s data included in this study have consent for publication.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Literatur
1.
Zurück zum Zitat Galimberti V, Vicini E, Corso G, Morigi C, Fontana S, Sacchini V, et al. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. the breast. 2017;34(suppl 1):s82–s4.CrossRef Galimberti V, Vicini E, Corso G, Morigi C, Fontana S, Sacchini V, et al. Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. the breast. 2017;34(suppl 1):s82–s4.CrossRef
2.
Zurück zum Zitat De La Cruz L, Am M, Ee T, Sa B, Em H. Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and nipple–areolar recurrence in the setting of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review. An Surg Oncol. 2015;22(10):3241–9.CrossRef De La Cruz L, Am M, Ee T, Sa B, Em H. Overall survival, disease-free survival, local recurrence, and nipple–areolar recurrence in the setting of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a meta-analysis and systematic review. An Surg Oncol. 2015;22(10):3241–9.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Huang N-S, Wu J. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer. Chin Med J. 2015;128(16):2256–61.CrossRef Huang N-S, Wu J. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer. Chin Med J. 2015;128(16):2256–61.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Rossi C, Mingozzi M, Curcio A, Buggi F, Folli S. Nipple areola complex sparing mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015;4(6):528–40. Rossi C, Mingozzi M, Curcio A, Buggi F, Folli S. Nipple areola complex sparing mastectomy. Gland Surg. 2015;4(6):528–40.
5.
Zurück zum Zitat nave o, elbaz m. Artificial immune system features added to breast cancer clinical data for machine learning (ml) applications. biosystems. 2021;202:104341.CrossRef nave o, elbaz m. Artificial immune system features added to breast cancer clinical data for machine learning (ml) applications. biosystems. 2021;202:104341.CrossRef
6.
Zurück zum Zitat Nave O, Elbaz M, Bunimovich-Mendrazitsky S. Analysis of a breast cancer mathematical model by a new method to find an optimal protocol for her2-positive cancer. biosystems. 2020;197:104191.CrossRef Nave O, Elbaz M, Bunimovich-Mendrazitsky S. Analysis of a breast cancer mathematical model by a new method to find an optimal protocol for her2-positive cancer. biosystems. 2020;197:104191.CrossRef
7.
Zurück zum Zitat BS M, Riera R, MD R, Barrett J, TB DC, ÁN A, et al. Nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2016(11):cd008932. BS M, Riera R, MD R, Barrett J, TB DC, ÁN A, et al. Nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;2016(11):cd008932.
8.
Zurück zum Zitat Galimberti V, Morigi C, Bagnardi V, Corso G, Vicini E, SKR F, et al. Oncological outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-center experience of 1989 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(13):3849–57.CrossRef Galimberti V, Morigi C, Bagnardi V, Corso G, Vicini E, SKR F, et al. Oncological outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-center experience of 1989 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(13):3849–57.CrossRef
9.
Zurück zum Zitat WP W, Haug M, Kurzeder C, Bjelic-Radisic V, Koller R, Reitsamer R, et al. Oncoplastic breast consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;172(3):523–37.CrossRef WP W, Haug M, Kurzeder C, Bjelic-Radisic V, Koller R, Reitsamer R, et al. Oncoplastic breast consortium consensus conference on nipple-sparing mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;172(3):523–37.CrossRef
10.
Zurück zum Zitat YY-R N, VK-M T, WS P, JH-E C, Sim Y, KW O, et al. Surgical and oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in an asian population. Breast Cancer. 2018;26(2):165–71. YY-R N, VK-M T, WS P, JH-E C, Sim Y, KW O, et al. Surgical and oncological safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy in an asian population. Breast Cancer. 2018;26(2):165–71.
11.
Zurück zum Zitat SJ A, TY W, DW L, DH L, SY S. Nipple-areolar complex ischemia and necrosis in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(8):1170–6.CrossRef SJ A, TY W, DW L, DH L, SY S. Nipple-areolar complex ischemia and necrosis in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(8):1170–6.CrossRef
13.
Zurück zum Zitat Parks L. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: impact on surgical resection, oncologic safety, and psychological well-being. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2021;12(5):499–506. Parks L. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer: impact on surgical resection, oncologic safety, and psychological well-being. J Adv Pract Oncol. 2021;12(5):499–506.
14.
Zurück zum Zitat Piper M, AW P, RD F, DH M, LJ E. Total skin-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(4):435–7.CrossRef Piper M, AW P, RD F, DH M, LJ E. Total skin-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review of oncologic outcomes and postoperative complications. Ann Plast Surg. 2013;70(4):435–7.CrossRef
15.
Zurück zum Zitat Handel N, Yegiyants S. Managing necrosis of the nipple areolar complex following reduction mammaplasty and mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43(2):415–23.CrossRef Handel N, Yegiyants S. Managing necrosis of the nipple areolar complex following reduction mammaplasty and mastopexy. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43(2):415–23.CrossRef
16.
Zurück zum Zitat RA A, Al Omran Y, Wellstead G, Sagoo H, Barai I, Rajmohan S, et al. Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing versus skin-sparing mastectomy. BJS Open. 2019;3(2):135–45.CrossRef RA A, Al Omran Y, Wellstead G, Sagoo H, Barai I, Rajmohan S, et al. Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing versus skin-sparing mastectomy. BJS Open. 2019;3(2):135–45.CrossRef
17.
Zurück zum Zitat Rancati A, Irigo M, Angrigiani C. Management of the ischemic nipple–areola complex after breast reduction. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43(2):403–14.CrossRef Rancati A, Irigo M, Angrigiani C. Management of the ischemic nipple–areola complex after breast reduction. Clin Plast Surg. 2016;43(2):403–14.CrossRef
18.
Zurück zum Zitat JD F, AA S, JP L, NS K, Choi M. Incision choices in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstruct Surg. 2018;142(6):826e–35e.CrossRef JD F, AA S, JP L, NS K, Choi M. Incision choices in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plast Reconstruct Surg. 2018;142(6):826e–35e.CrossRef
19.
Zurück zum Zitat Webb C, Gupta N, Kosiorek H, PA C, BA P, RJ G. The effects of body mass index on operative time and outcomes in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Am J Surg. 2020;220(2):395–400.CrossRef Webb C, Gupta N, Kosiorek H, PA C, BA P, RJ G. The effects of body mass index on operative time and outcomes in nipple-sparing mastectomy. Am J Surg. 2020;220(2):395–400.CrossRef
20.
Zurück zum Zitat EB O, RP P, Um G, SW K, AE C, JA M, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy incisions for cancer extirpation prospective cohort trial. Plast Reconstruct Surg. 2018;142(1):13–26.CrossRef EB O, RP P, Um G, SW K, AE C, JA M, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy incisions for cancer extirpation prospective cohort trial. Plast Reconstruct Surg. 2018;142(1):13–26.CrossRef
21.
Zurück zum Zitat AA S, JD F, JM B, NS K, Choi M. Ischemic complications after nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of reconstructive failure in implant-based reconstruction and implications for decision-making. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7(5):e2280.CrossRef AA S, JD F, JM B, NS K, Choi M. Ischemic complications after nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of reconstructive failure in implant-based reconstruction and implications for decision-making. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2019;7(5):e2280.CrossRef
22.
Zurück zum Zitat JE R, BL S, GPH G. Nipple-sparing mastectomy. Bri J Surg. 2010;97(3):305–16.CrossRef JE R, BL S, GPH G. Nipple-sparing mastectomy. Bri J Surg. 2010;97(3):305–16.CrossRef
23.
Zurück zum Zitat Bahl M, IJ P, KJ B, SE H, RA G, SV G, et al. Can vascular patterns on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging help predict skin necrosis after nipple-sparing mastectomy? J Am College Surg. 2016;223(2):279–85.CrossRef Bahl M, IJ P, KJ B, SE H, RA G, SV G, et al. Can vascular patterns on preoperative magnetic resonance imaging help predict skin necrosis after nipple-sparing mastectomy? J Am College Surg. 2016;223(2):279–85.CrossRef
24.
Zurück zum Zitat Ls K, Pj T, Pd W, Kt N. Delay techniques for nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthet Surg. 2017;70(2):236–42.CrossRef Ls K, Pj T, Pd W, Kt N. Delay techniques for nipple-sparing mastectomy: a systematic review. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthet Surg. 2017;70(2):236–42.CrossRef
25.
Zurück zum Zitat DA D, SA A, Rosario L, WJ R, PJ S, GA W, et al. Is there a preferred incision location for nipple-sparing mastectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Plastic Reconstruct Surg. 2019;143(5):906e–19e.CrossRef DA D, SA A, Rosario L, WJ R, PJ S, GA W, et al. Is there a preferred incision location for nipple-sparing mastectomy? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Plastic Reconstruct Surg. 2019;143(5):906e–19e.CrossRef
26.
Zurück zum Zitat Kontos M, Lanitis S, Constantinidou A, Sakarellos P, Vagios E, Ec T, et al. Nipple-sparing skin-reducing mastectomy with reconstruction for large ptotic breasts. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthet Surg. 2020;73(4):690–5.CrossRef Kontos M, Lanitis S, Constantinidou A, Sakarellos P, Vagios E, Ec T, et al. Nipple-sparing skin-reducing mastectomy with reconstruction for large ptotic breasts. J Plastic Reconstruct Aesthet Surg. 2020;73(4):690–5.CrossRef
27.
Zurück zum Zitat Houvenaeghel G, Cohen M, Ma D, D’halluin F, Regis C, Gutowski M, et al. Prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: results of a french prospective trial. Bri J Surg. 2021;108(3):296–301.CrossRef Houvenaeghel G, Cohen M, Ma D, D’halluin F, Regis C, Gutowski M, et al. Prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: results of a french prospective trial. Bri J Surg. 2021;108(3):296–301.CrossRef
28.
Zurück zum Zitat AL K, Zanini V, Regolo L, Carolei A, Wm W, Costa A. Necrotic complications after nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy. World J Surg. 2006;30:1410–3.CrossRef AL K, Zanini V, Regolo L, Carolei A, Wm W, Costa A. Necrotic complications after nipple- and areola-sparing mastectomy. World J Surg. 2006;30:1410–3.CrossRef
29.
Zurück zum Zitat Garwood ER, et al. “Total Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: Complications and Local Recurrence Rates in 2 Cohorts of Patients.” Ann Surg. 2009;249:26–32. Garwood ER, et al. “Total Skin-Sparing Mastectomy: Complications and Local Recurrence Rates in 2 Cohorts of Patients.” Ann Surg. 2009;249:26–32.
30.
Zurück zum Zitat ZK A, JY P, Lohsiriwat V, Maisonneuve P, PC R, Baros N, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: can we predict the factors predisposing to necrosis? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38:125–9.CrossRef ZK A, JY P, Lohsiriwat V, Maisonneuve P, PC R, Baros N, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: can we predict the factors predisposing to necrosis? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38:125–9.CrossRef
32.
Zurück zum Zitat As C, Tessler O, AM L, Liao E, Winograd J, CL C, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of complications, reconstruction outcomes, and 5-year trends. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:496–506.CrossRef As C, Tessler O, AM L, Liao E, Winograd J, CL C, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy: predictors of complications, reconstruction outcomes, and 5-year trends. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2014;133:496–506.CrossRef
33.
Zurück zum Zitat SL S, SC W, ED F, Cocilovo C, Sidawy M, Al-Attar A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(5):1005–14.CrossRef SL S, SC W, ED F, Cocilovo C, Sidawy M, Al-Attar A, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128(5):1005–14.CrossRef
34.
Zurück zum Zitat DM B, Nguyen D, Rochlin D, Hernandez-Boussard T, Meyer S, Choy N, et al. Protecting nipple perfusion by devascularization and surgical delay in patients at risk for ischemic complications during nipple-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(8):2665–72.CrossRef DM B, Nguyen D, Rochlin D, Hernandez-Boussard T, Meyer S, Choy N, et al. Protecting nipple perfusion by devascularization and surgical delay in patients at risk for ischemic complications during nipple-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(8):2665–72.CrossRef
35.
Zurück zum Zitat Park S, Yoon C, Sj B, Cha C, Kim D, Lee J, et al. Comparison of complications according to incision types in nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Breast. 2020;53:85–91.CrossRef Park S, Yoon C, Sj B, Cha C, Kim D, Lee J, et al. Comparison of complications according to incision types in nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction. Breast. 2020;53:85–91.CrossRef
36.
Zurück zum Zitat HW L, ST C, YJ L, SL L, CM L, DR C, et al. Minimal access (endoscopic and robotic) breast surgery in the surgical treatment of early breast cancer- trend and clinical outcome from a single-surgeon experience over 10 years. Front Oncol. 2021;11:739144.CrossRef HW L, ST C, YJ L, SL L, CM L, DR C, et al. Minimal access (endoscopic and robotic) breast surgery in the surgical treatment of early breast cancer- trend and clinical outcome from a single-surgeon experience over 10 years. Front Oncol. 2021;11:739144.CrossRef
37.
Zurück zum Zitat AS C, Tessler O, AM L, Liao E, Winograd J, CL C, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plastic Reconstruct Surg. 2014;133(3):496–506.CrossRef AS C, Tessler O, AM L, Liao E, Winograd J, CL C, et al. Breast reconstruction following nipple-sparing mastectomy. Plastic Reconstruct Surg. 2014;133(3):496–506.CrossRef
38.
Zurück zum Zitat Quilichini O, Barrou J, Bannier M, Rua S, Van Troy A, Sabiani L, et al. Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: results of a mono-centric 4-years cohort. Ann Med Surg. 2021;61:172–9.CrossRef Quilichini O, Barrou J, Bannier M, Rua S, Van Troy A, Sabiani L, et al. Mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: results of a mono-centric 4-years cohort. Ann Med Surg. 2021;61:172–9.CrossRef
39.
Zurück zum Zitat Chen S-T, Lai H-W, Wu W-P, Chen S-T, Liao C-Y, Wu H-K, et al. The impact of body mass index (bmi) on mri diagnostic performance and surgical management for axillary lymph node in breast cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2022;20(1):45.CrossRef Chen S-T, Lai H-W, Wu W-P, Chen S-T, Liao C-Y, Wu H-K, et al. The impact of body mass index (bmi) on mri diagnostic performance and surgical management for axillary lymph node in breast cancer. World J Surg Oncol. 2022;20(1):45.CrossRef
40.
Zurück zum Zitat Orzalesi L, Casella D, Santi C, Cecconi L, Murgo R, Rinaldi S, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: surgical and oncological outcomes from a national multicentric registry with 913 patients (1006 cases) over a six year period. Breast. 2016;25:75–81.CrossRef Orzalesi L, Casella D, Santi C, Cecconi L, Murgo R, Rinaldi S, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy: surgical and oncological outcomes from a national multicentric registry with 913 patients (1006 cases) over a six year period. Breast. 2016;25:75–81.CrossRef
41.
Zurück zum Zitat Franceschini G, Masetti R. Evidence-based nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with higher body mass index: recommendations for a successful standardized surgery. Am J Surg. 2020;220(2):393–4.CrossRef Franceschini G, Masetti R. Evidence-based nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with higher body mass index: recommendations for a successful standardized surgery. Am J Surg. 2020;220(2):393–4.CrossRef
42.
Zurück zum Zitat Zarba Meli E, Cattin F, Curcio A, Manna E, Samorani D, Tognali D, et al. Surgical delay may extend the indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy: a multicentric study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019;45(8):1373–7.CrossRef Zarba Meli E, Cattin F, Curcio A, Manna E, Samorani D, Tognali D, et al. Surgical delay may extend the indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy: a multicentric study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2019;45(8):1373–7.CrossRef
43.
Zurück zum Zitat HW L, DR C, YC W, CJ C, CW L, SJ K, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging with sonography in the prediction of breast cancer tumor size: a concordance analysis with histopathologically determined tumor size. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(12):3816–23.CrossRef HW L, DR C, YC W, CJ C, CW L, SJ K, et al. Comparison of the diagnostic accuracy of magnetic resonance imaging with sonography in the prediction of breast cancer tumor size: a concordance analysis with histopathologically determined tumor size. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(12):3816–23.CrossRef
44.
Zurück zum Zitat HW L, CJ C, YJ L, SL C, HK W, YT W, et al. Does breast magnetic resonance imaging combined with conventional imaging modalities decrease the rates of surgical margin involvement and reoperation?: A case-control comparative analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(22):e3810.CrossRef HW L, CJ C, YJ L, SL C, HK W, YT W, et al. Does breast magnetic resonance imaging combined with conventional imaging modalities decrease the rates of surgical margin involvement and reoperation?: A case-control comparative analysis. Medicine. 2016;95(22):e3810.CrossRef
45.
Zurück zum Zitat Lee CW, Wu HK, Lai HW, Wu WP, Chen ST, Chen DR, et al. Preoperative clinicopathologic factors and breast magnetic resonance imaging features can predict ductal carcinoma in situ with invasive components. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(4):780–9.CrossRef Lee CW, Wu HK, Lai HW, Wu WP, Chen ST, Chen DR, et al. Preoperative clinicopathologic factors and breast magnetic resonance imaging features can predict ductal carcinoma in situ with invasive components. Eur J Radiol. 2016;85(4):780–9.CrossRef
46.
Zurück zum Zitat Braun SE, Dreicer M, Butterworth JA, Larson KE. Do nipple necrosis rates differ in prepectoral versus submuscular implant-based reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(12):4760–6.CrossRef Braun SE, Dreicer M, Butterworth JA, Larson KE. Do nipple necrosis rates differ in prepectoral versus submuscular implant-based reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(12):4760–6.CrossRef
Metadaten
Titel
Nipple-areolar complex (NAC) or skin flap ischemia necrosis post nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM)—analysis of clinicopathologic factors and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) features
verfasst von
Hung-Wen Lai
Yi-Yuan Lee
Shou-Tung Chen
Chiung-Ying Liao
Tsung-Lin Tsai
Dar-Ren Chen
Yuan-Chieh Lai
Wen-Pin Kao
Wen-Pei Wu
Publikationsdatum
01.12.2023
Verlag
BioMed Central
Erschienen in
World Journal of Surgical Oncology / Ausgabe 1/2023
Elektronische ISSN: 1477-7819
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-02898-x

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2023

World Journal of Surgical Oncology 1/2023 Zur Ausgabe

Vorsicht, erhöhte Blutungsgefahr nach PCI!

10.05.2024 Koronare Herzerkrankung Nachrichten

Nach PCI besteht ein erhöhtes Blutungsrisiko, wenn die Behandelten eine verminderte linksventrikuläre Ejektionsfraktion aufweisen. Das Risiko ist umso höher, je stärker die Pumpfunktion eingeschränkt ist.

Darf man die Behandlung eines Neonazis ablehnen?

08.05.2024 Gesellschaft Nachrichten

In einer Leseranfrage in der Zeitschrift Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology möchte ein anonymer Dermatologe bzw. eine anonyme Dermatologin wissen, ob er oder sie einen Patienten behandeln muss, der eine rassistische Tätowierung trägt.

Deutlich weniger Infektionen: Wundprotektoren schützen!

08.05.2024 Postoperative Wundinfektion Nachrichten

Der Einsatz von Wundprotektoren bei offenen Eingriffen am unteren Gastrointestinaltrakt schützt vor Infektionen im Op.-Gebiet – und dient darüber hinaus der besseren Sicht. Das bestätigt mit großer Robustheit eine randomisierte Studie im Fachblatt JAMA Surgery.

Chirurginnen und Chirurgen sind stark suizidgefährdet

07.05.2024 Suizid Nachrichten

Der belastende Arbeitsalltag wirkt sich negativ auf die psychische Gesundheit der Angehörigen ärztlicher Berufsgruppen aus. Chirurginnen und Chirurgen bilden da keine Ausnahme, im Gegenteil.

Update Chirurgie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

S3-Leitlinie „Diagnostik und Therapie des Karpaltunnelsyndroms“

Karpaltunnelsyndrom BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Karpaltunnelsyndrom ist die häufigste Kompressionsneuropathie peripherer Nerven. Obwohl die Anamnese mit dem nächtlichen Einschlafen der Hand (Brachialgia parästhetica nocturna) sehr typisch ist, ist eine klinisch-neurologische Untersuchung und Elektroneurografie in manchen Fällen auch eine Neurosonografie erforderlich. Im Anfangsstadium sind konservative Maßnahmen (Handgelenksschiene, Ergotherapie) empfehlenswert. Bei nicht Ansprechen der konservativen Therapie oder Auftreten von neurologischen Ausfällen ist eine Dekompression des N. medianus am Karpaltunnel indiziert.

Prof. Dr. med. Gregor Antoniadis
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S2e-Leitlinie „Distale Radiusfraktur“

Radiusfraktur BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Das Webinar beschäftigt sich mit Fragen und Antworten zu Diagnostik und Klassifikation sowie Möglichkeiten des Ausschlusses von Zusatzverletzungen. Die Referenten erläutern, welche Frakturen konservativ behandelt werden können und wie. Das Webinar beantwortet die Frage nach aktuellen operativen Therapiekonzepten: Welcher Zugang, welches Osteosynthesematerial? Auf was muss bei der Nachbehandlung der distalen Radiusfraktur geachtet werden?

PD Dr. med. Oliver Pieske
Dr. med. Benjamin Meyknecht
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.

S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“

Appendizitis BDC Leitlinien Webinare
CME: 2 Punkte

Inhalte des Webinars zur S1-Leitlinie „Empfehlungen zur Therapie der akuten Appendizitis bei Erwachsenen“ sind die Darstellung des Projektes und des Erstellungswegs zur S1-Leitlinie, die Erläuterung der klinischen Relevanz der Klassifikation EAES 2015, die wissenschaftliche Begründung der wichtigsten Empfehlungen und die Darstellung stadiengerechter Therapieoptionen.

Dr. med. Mihailo Andric
Berufsverband der Deutschen Chirurgie e.V.