title: Nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with a history of reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy: how safe is it?
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Nipple-sparing mastectomy has gained popularity, but the question remains of whether it can be offered safely to women with a history of reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy. The authors present their experience with nipple-sparing mastectomy in this patient population.
  
  
  METHODS
  Patients at the authors' institution who had reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy before nipple-sparing mastectomy were identified. Outcomes measured include nipple-areola complex viability, mastectomy flap necrosis, infection, presence of cancer in the nipple-areola complex, and breast cancer recurrence.
  
  
  RESULTS
  The records of the nipple-sparing mastectomy patients at the authors' institution from 2006 through 2012 were reviewed. The authors identified 13 breasts in eight patients that had nipple-sparing mastectomy following reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy. Within this subset of patients, the mean age was 46.6 years and the mean body mass index was 25.1. Nine of 13 breasts had therapeutic resections, whereas the remaining four were for prophylactic indications. Average time elapsed between reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy and nipple-sparing mastectomy was 51.8 months (range, 33 days to 11 years). In all cases, prior reduction mammaplasty/mastopexy incisions were used for nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ten breasts underwent reconstruction immediately with tissue expanders, one with a latissimus dorsi flap with immediate implant and two with immediate abdominally based free flaps. Complications included one hematoma requiring evacuation and one displaced implant requiring revision. There were no positive subareolar biopsy results, and the nipple viability was 100 percent. Mean follow-up time was 10.5 months.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  The authors' experience demonstrates that nipple-sparing mastectomy can be offered to patients with a history of reduction mammaplasty or mastopexy with reconstructive outcomes comparable to those of nipple-sparing mastectomy alone.
  
  
  METHODS
  Therapeutic, IV.
authors: New York and Manhasset, N.Y.; Philadelphia, Pa.; and Houston, Texas From New York University Medical Center, North Shore-Long Island Jewish Health System, University of Pennsylvania Health System, and M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.
authors: Michael
authors: M
authors: Alperovich
authors: Neil
authors: N
authors: Tanna
authors: Fares
authors: F
authors: Samra
authors: Keith M
authors: KM
authors: Blechman
authors: Richard L
authors: RL
authors: Shapiro
authors: Amber A
authors: AA
authors: Guth
authors: Deborah M
authors: DM
authors: Axelrod
authors: Mihye
authors: M
authors: Choi
authors: Nolan S
authors: NS
authors: Karp
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D001943:Breast Neoplasms / Q000601:surgery*; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D006801:Humans; D016462:Mammaplasty / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D008408:Mastectomy / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000379:methods*; D008875:Middle Aged; D009364:Neoplasm Recurrence, Local / Q000517:prevention & control*; D009558:Nipples / Q000601:surgery*; D011183:Postoperative Complications / Q000517:prevention & control*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D013524:Surgical Flaps; D015625:Tissue Expansion Devices; D016896:Treatment Outcome
references: Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1233–1241
references: Freeman BS. Technique of subcutaneous mastectomy with replacement; immediate and delayed. Br J Plast Surg. 1969;22:161–166
references: Hinton CP, Doyle PJ, Blamey RW, Davies CJ, Holliday HW, Elston CW. Subcutaneous mastectomy for primary operable breast cancer. Br J Surg. 1984;71:469–472
references: Kissin MW, Kark AE. Nipple preservation during mastectomy. Br J Surg. 1987;74:58–61
references: Hartmann LC, Schaid DJ, Woods JE, et al. Efficacy of bilateral prophylactic mastectomy in women with a family history of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340:77–84
references: Didier F, Radice D, Gandini S, et al. Does nipple preservation in mastectomy improve satisfaction with cosmetic results, psychological adjustment, body image and sexuality?. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;118:623–633
references: de Alcantara Filho P, Capko D, Barry JM, Morrow M, Pusic A, Sacchini VS. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk-reducing surgery: The Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3117–3122
references: Warren Peled A, Foster RD, Stover AC, et al. Outcomes after total skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction in 657 breasts. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3402–3409
references: Spear SL, Willey SC, Feldman ED, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;128:1005–1014
references: Spear SL, Rottman SJ, Seiboth LA, Hannan CM. Breast reconstruction using a staged nipple-sparing mastectomy following mastopexy or reduction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2012;129:572–581
references: Komorowska-Timek E, Gurtner GC. Intraoperative perfusion mapping with laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging can predict and prevent complications in immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125:1065–1073
references: Woods JE. Detailed technique of subcutaneous mastectomy with and without mastopexy. Ann Plast Surg. 1987;18:51–61
references: Rivolin A, Kubatzki F, Marocco F, et al. Nipple-areola complex sparing mastectomy with periareolar pexy for breast cancer patients with moderately ptotic breasts. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65:296–303
references: Karp NS. Medial pedicle/vertical breast reduction made easy: The importance of complete inferior glandular resection. Ann Plast Surg. 2004;52:458–464