CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2019; 79(06): 584-590
DOI: 10.1055/a-0873-8110
GebFra Science
Review/Übersicht
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Surgical Studies of Reconstructive Breast Surgery – An Overview of the Topics at the 2019 Annual Meeting of the Working Group for Reconstructive Surgery in Oncology-Gynecology

Article in several languages: English | deutsch
Stefan Paepke
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Marion Kiechle
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Christine Ankel
2   Rotkreuzklinikum München, München, Germany
,
Joy Weyrich
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Evelyn Klein
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Anna Schneider
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Navid Johannigmann-Malek
3   Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universitat München, München, Germany
,
Anna-Sophia Dietrich
1   Klinik und Poliklinik für Frauenheilkunde, Klinikum rechts der Isar der Technischen Universität München, München, Germany
,
Ralf Ohlinger
4   Gynaecology and Obstetrics, Universitatsmedizin Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany
,
Marc Thill
5   Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Interdisziplinäres Brustzentrum, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus Frankfurt am Main, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

received 27 February 2019

accepted 12 March 2019

Publication Date:
14 June 2019 (online)

   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

This yearʼs annual AWOgyn meeting focused on studies of reconstructive breast surgery. As the majority of breast reconstructions are implant-based, most studies also focused on implant-based reconstruction. Since 2011, the guidelines have recommended using interposed mesh materials as support. The basic idea behind every type of material is to provide coverage and stabilization for the implant by constructing an “internal bra” which will create the appropriate implant shape and maintain the position, stability and flexibility of the implant. The Working Group for Reconstructive Surgery in Oncology-Gynecology (AWOgyn) has undertaken to analyze different materials with regard to indications, success rates and side effects as documented in registers, clinical assessments and study protocols. This has increased application safety and is expected to improve it even further in future. Prospective studies are being carried out to investigate issues such as the optimal material, optimal implant site and best cosmetic results. The first results for porcine and human acellular matrices and for partially resorbable titanium-coated synthetic polypropylene meshes are now available. In 2019, the AWOgyn working group will be launching further studies to evaluate a perforated acellular dermal matrix (Fortiva®), a titanium-coated implant pocket (TiLOOP® Bra Pocket) and a fully resorbable synthetic mesh (TIGR®mesh).

Key words

reconstructive breast surgery - implant position - application safety
 

  • References/Literatur

  • 1 Paepke S. Präpektorale Implantateinlage in der plastisch-rekonstruktiven Mammachirurgie unter Verwendung des TiLOOP® Bra Pocket. Senologie 2018; 15: e36-e37 doi:10.1055/s-0038-16516774
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Blohmer JU. Prospektive multizentrische nicht-interventionellen AWOGyn-NOGGO Intergroupstudie mit Epiflex® in der Brustrekonstruktion. Senologie 2018; 15: e3 doi:10.1055/s-0038-1651677
    Article in Thieme ConnectGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Rezai M, Kern P. Neue operative Methoden der Brustchirurgie. Probleme und Lösungen. J Ästhet Chir 2012; 5: 29-36
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 4 Downes KJ, Glatt BS, Kanchwala SK. et al. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction is an acceptable treatment option for patients with high-risk breast carcinoma. Cancer 2005; 103: 906-913
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Paepke S, Schmid R, Fleckner S. et al. Subcutaneous mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola-skin: broadening the indications. Ann Surg 2009; 250: 288-292
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 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: 461-468
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Carlson GW, Bostwick J, Styblo TM. et al. Skin-sparing mastectomy. Oncologic and reconstructive considerations. Ann Surg 1997; 225: 570-575
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Carlson GW, Styblo TM, Lyles RH. et al. Local recurrence after skin-sparing mastectomy: tumor biology or surgical conservatism?. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10: 108-112
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Glöggler A. Operative Therapie des Mammakarzinoms unter onkologischen Aspekten. 22.03.2012 Online: http://www.ago-online.de/fileadmin/downloads/leitlinien/mamma/maerz2012/07_2012D_Operative_Therapie_des_Mammakarzinoms_unter_onkologischen_Aspekten.pdf last access: 27.08.2012
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Niemeyer M, Ettl J, Plattner B. et al. Extended indications for skin conservation of the nipple areola complex during subcutaneous mastectomy. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2010; 282 (Suppl. 01) 3-62 (#43)
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Niemeyer M, Paepke S, Niemeyer B. et al. Mamillen erhaltende Mastektomie – Ist die Fokussierung auf eine verbesserte Kosmetik in Bezug auf die onkologische Sicherheit vertretbar?. Senologie 2011; 8: A141
    Google Scholar
  • 12 American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic Surgery Statistics Report 2015. Online: https://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics last access: 13.11.2016
    Google Scholar
  • 13 Serletti JM, Fosnot J, Nelson JA. et al. Breast reconstruction after breast cancer. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 127: 124e-135e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 14 Albernoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrars BJ. A paradigm shift in U.S. breast reconstruction increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131: 15-23
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 15 Davies K, Allan L, Roblin P. et al. Factors affecting post-operative complications following skin sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. Breast 2011; 20: 21-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 16 Dian D, Anthuber C, Bauerfeind I, Beyreuther HJ, Braun M, Bubb CF, De Waal JC, Drinova V, Edler von Koch F, Engel J, Gabka C, Hamann U, Heitmann C, Himsl I, Kaiser C, Kolben M, Löhrs B, Mosner M, Paepke S, Schwoerer M, Taskov C, Weiß E, Widschwendtner P. Operative Therapie des primären Mammakarzinoms und Rekonstruktionsverfahren. In: Bauerfeind I. Projektgruppe Mammakarzinom, Tumorregister München. Hrsg. Manual Mammakarzinome. Empfehlungen zur Diagnostik, Therapie und Nachsorge. 13. Aufl.. Stuttgart: Thieme; 2011: 121-127
    Google Scholar
  • 17 Brunnert K, Warm M. Technik der Gewebeexpansion in der plastischen Chirurgie. Gynäkol Praxis 2008; 32: 479-493
    Google Scholar
  • 18 Dieterich M, Faridi A. Biological matrices and synthetic meshes used in implant-based breast reconstruction – a review of products available in Germany. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2013; 73: 1100-1106
    Article in Thieme ConnectPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 19 Paepke S, Bronger H, Paepke D. et al. Titanised mesh supported immediate reconstruction after subcutaneous nipple-areola-complex conserving mastectomy – First experiences with the TiLoopBra® . Rev SenologiaPatol Mam 2010; 23 (Suppl. 01) 163210. (#170)
    Google Scholar
  • 20 Paepke S, Dittmer S, Rezai A. et al. Subpectoral implants in oncoplastic-reconstructive breast surgery: Habit or necessity?. Eur J Cancer 2012; 8 (Suppl. 01) 212
    Google Scholar
  • 21 Paepke S, Klein E, Ettl J. et al. Nipple Sparing Subcutaneous Mastectomy (NSSM) as Dual-plane Prosthetic Reconstruction Using the Modified Wise Pattern Mastectomy, Fasciocutaneous Flap and Titan-Polypropylene-Mesh-Interponation in Women with Macromastia. Eur J Cancer 2012; 8 (Suppl. 01) 212
    Google Scholar
  • 22 Paepke S, Klein E, Ettl J. et al. Systematik der TiLoopBra®-gestützten gewebeinterponierenden Operationstechniken i.R. der plastisch-rekonstruktiven Mammachirurgie. Senologie 2011; 8: A145
    Google Scholar
  • 23 Paepke S, Müller D, Paepke D. et al. Aktuelle Aspekte in der operativen und plastisch-rekonstruktiven Mammachirurgie. Journal Onkologie 2009; 5: 248-250
    Google Scholar
  • 24 Paepke S, Niemeyer M, Krol J. et al. Erfahrungen mit dem Einsatz eines titanisierten Polypropylennetzes in der onkoplastischen Brustchirurgie. PraktischeGynäkologiegyn 2010; 15: 150-156
    Google Scholar
  • 25 Perabó M, Bodungen V, Drinovac V. et al. Brustaufbau mit Schweinehautmatrix. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2011; 71: 7-9
    Google Scholar
  • 26 Spear SL, Seruya M, Clemens MW. et al. Acellular dermal matrix for treatment and prevention of implant associated breast deformities. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 127: 1047-1057
    Google Scholar
  • 27 Spies M. Der Einsatz von regenerativen Gewebeersatzmaterialien in der plastischen Chirurgie. Plastische Chirurgie 2009; 2: 91-94
    Google Scholar
  • 28 Dittmer S, Paepke S, Klein E. et al. First experience with the implementation of a two component polypropylene Vicryl-mesh (SeragynBr®) as tissue-supporting extraneous material in plastic reconstructive surgery. Eur J Cancer 2012; 8 (Suppl. 01) 224
    Google Scholar
  • 29 Harms E. Application and biological behavior of a partial resorbable alloplastic breast surgery. Vortrag auf der Jahrestagung der russisch deutschen Gesellschaft für Frauenheilkunde 2011.
    Google Scholar
  • 30 Hill U, Jentschke M, Soergel P. et al. Erste Erfahrungen mit azellulärer porciner dermaler Matrik in der rekonstruktiven Brustchirurgie mit Implantaten. Senologie 2012; 9: 106-110
    Google Scholar
  • 31 Kiechle M, Klein E, Paepke D. et al. Use of scellular dermis (Strattice TM) in problematic cases of breast reconstructive surgery. Eur J Cancer 2012; 8 (Suppl. 01) 177
    Google Scholar
  • 32 Klein E, Kiechle M, Ettl J. et al. TiLoopBra® als Gewebeinterponat bei subkutaner Mamillen-Areola-Komplex erhaltender Mastektomie (NSSM) – Strategiewechsel von Mehr- zu Einschrittoperationen und retrospektive Datenerhebung. Senologie 2011; 8: A105
    Google Scholar
  • 33 Klein E, Kiechle M, Ettl J. et al. Analysis of immediate breast reconstruction with the use of titanized polypropylene mesh (TiloopBra®). Eur J Cancer 2012; 8 (Suppl. 01) 224
    Google Scholar
  • 34 Nestle-Krämling C. Brustrekonstruktion. Verbesserte Möglichkeiten nach Sofortrekonstruktion mit Implantaten durch Biomaterial. Forum Sanitas 2010; 1: 33-35
    Google Scholar
  • 35 Cook LJ, Kovacs T. Novel devices for implant based breast reconstruction: is the use of meshes to support the lower pole justified in terms of benefits? A review of the evidence. Ecancer 2018; 12: 796 doi:10.3332/ecancer.2018.796
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 36 Dieterich M, Paepke S, Zwiefel K. et al. Implant-based breast reconstruction using a titanium-coated polypropylene mesh (TiLOOP Bra): a multicenter study of 231 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132: 8e-19e
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 37 Rezai M, Strauß S, Kimmig R. et al. Risk-reducing, conservative mastectomy – analysis of surgical outcome and quality of life in 272 implant-based reconstructions using Tiloop®Bra versus autologous corial flaps. Gland Surg 2016; 5: 1-8
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 38 Dieterich M, Stubert J, Gerber B. et al. Biocompatibility, cell growth and clinical relevance of synthetic meshes and biological matrixes for internal support in implant-based breast reconstruction. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2015; 291: 1371-1379
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 39 Derderian CA, Karp NS, Choi M. Wise pattern breast reconstruction: Modification using AlloDerm and a vascularized dermal-subcutaneous pedicle. Ann Plast Surg 2009; 62: 528-532
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 40 Gamboa-Bobadilla GM. Implant breast reconstruction using acellular dermis matrix. Ann Plast Surg 2006; 56: 22-25
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 41 Gschwantler-Kaulich D, Schrenk P, Bjelic-Radisic V. et al. Mesh versus acellular dermal matrix in immediate implant-based breast reconstruction – A prospective randomized trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 2016; 42: 665-671
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 42 Sigalove S, Maxwell PG, Sigalove Noemi M. et al. Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction: Rationale, indications, and preliminary results. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 139: 287-294
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 43 Paepke S, Ohlinger R, Klein E. et al. Prepectoral implant placement in plastic-reconstructive surgery – a contribution to the discussion. Senologie 2018; 15: 115-119
    Google Scholar
  • 44 Paepke S, Klein E, Krol J. et al. Subpectoral implants in oncoplastic-reconstructive breast surgery – habit or necessity? First experience with epipectoral implant positioning covered by acellular dermis and meshs. Jahrestagung der Association of British Breast Surgeons 2012.
    Google Scholar
  • 45 Reitsamer R, Peintinger F. Prepectoral implant placement and complete coverage with porcine acellular dermal matrix: a new technique for direct-to-implant breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2015; 68: 162-167 doi:10.1016/j.bjps.2014.10.012
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 46 Vidya R, Masià J, Cawthorn S. et al. Evaluation ofthe effectiveness of the prepectoral breast reconstruction with Braxon dermal matrix: First multicenter European report on 100 cases. Breast J 2017; 23: 670-676 doi:10.1111/tbj.12810
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 47 Cassella D, Calabrese C, Bianchi S. et al. Subcutaneous tissue expander placement with synthetic titanium-coated mesh in breast reconstruction: long term results. PRS GlobalOpen. Breast 2015; DOI: 10.1097/GOX/.00000000000000549.
    CrossrefGoogle Scholar
  • 48 Casella D, Bernini M, Bencini L. et al. TiLoop® Bra mesh used for immediate breast reconstruction: comparison of retropectoral and subcutaneous implant placement in a prospective single-institution series. Eur J Plast Surg 2014; 37: 599-604
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 49 Paepke S, Kiechle M, Ankel C. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) in implant based mesh-supported breast reconstruction – early results of a multicentre prospective trial. Deutsche Gesellschaft für Senologie Vortrag (2015).
    Google Scholar