ObjectiveTo compare the surgical data, safety, cosmetic outcomes, and quality of life of patients underwent single axillary incision endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with endoscopic harvesting of latissimus dorsi muscle flap (abbreviation as the “endoscopic group”) and traditional open surgery of latissimus dorsi muscle flap harvesting for breast reconstruction after mastectomy (abbreviation as the “open group”). MethodsThe patients were collected, who underwent latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction at the West China Hospital of Sichuan University and the Fourth People’s Hospital of Sichuan Province from January 2021 to June 2024 from a prospective maintenance database, and then were assigned into an endoscopic group and open group according to the surgical method. Their basic information, information relevant operation, postoperative complications, and patient reported outcomes (BREAST-Q scale) score were compared between the two groups. ResultsA total of 73 patients were enrolled, including 23 patients in the endoscopic group and 50 patients in the open group. There were no statistically significant differences in the age, body mass index, breast sagging, tumor location, tumor N stage, pathological type, adjuvant therapy, etc. between the patients of two groups, except for a higher proportion of T4 stage patients in the open group as compared with the endoscopic group (P＜0.001). A longer size of latissimus dorsi muscle flap was harvested in the endoscopic group as compared with the open group (P=0.002). There were no statistically significant differences in the total surgical complications, major complications, minor complications, and implant-related complications between the patients of two groups (P>0.05). The most common complication in the patients of both groups was back seroma, 21.7% (5/23) in the endoscopic group and 22.0% (11/50) in the open group. The total length of incisions in the endoscopic group was significantly shorter than that in the open group (P<0.001), and the points of the breast satisfaction (P=0.045), back satisfaction (P<0.001), and sexual well-being (P=0.028) of the patients in the endoscopic group were significantly higher than those in the open group. The major complications did not happen in the endoscopic group, but happened in 2 cases in the open group (1 patient due to ischemic necrosis of the latissimus dorsi muscle and 1 patient due to breast infection resulting in implant removal). During the follow-up period, 3 (6.0%) patients had distant metastasis (all were lung metastasis) in the open group, and there was no local or regional recurrence, distant metastasis, and specific death of breast cancer in the endoscopic group. ConclusionsThe results of this study suggest that, for patients who have skin invasion but who desire breast reconstruction or have failed by prosthetic breast reconstruction (such as skin flap necrosis), traditional open surgery of latissimusdorsi flap harvesting for breast reconstruction is worth choosing. However, for breast cancer patients who do not need additional skin breast reconstruction, endoscopic latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction has greater advantages in cosmetic effect, and it is safe and effective.
ObjectiveTo optimize the perioperative management experiences for breast cancer patients undergoing direct-to-implant-based breast reconstruction, and provide reference for clinical practice. Methods A comprehensive review of recent domestic and international literature was conducted to systematically summarize the key points of perioperative management for direct-to-implant-based breast reconstruction, including preoperative health education, intraoperative strategies, and postoperative management measures, along with an introduction to the clinical experiences of West China Hospital of Sichuan University. ResultsStandardized perioperative management can effectively reduce the incidence of complications and achieve excellent cosmetic outcomes and quality of life after operation. Pre-operative management includes proactive health education to alleviate patients’ anxiety and improve treatment compliance, as well as comprehensive assessment by surgeons of the patient’s physical condition and reconstructive expectations to select the most appropriate implant. Intra-operative management consists of strict aseptic technique, minimizing implant exposure, preserving blood supply to the nipple-areola complex (e.g., by using minimally invasive techniques and indocyanine green angiography), and meticulous hemostasis. Post-operative management encompasses multimodal analgesia, individualized drain management (such as early removal or retaining a small amount of fluid to optimize contour), infection prevention and control (including topical and systemic antibiotics, ultrasound-guided minimally invasive drainage), guidance on rehabilitation exercises (early activity restriction followed by gradual recovery), and regular follow-up to evaluate aesthetic results and monitor for complications. ConclusionEstablishing a standardized, multidisciplinary perioperative management framework markedly enhances surgical safety and patient satisfaction, thereby providing a replicable benchmark for direct-to-implant-based breast reconstruction across diverse clinical settings.