L’effet d’interventions gynécologiques prophylactiques combinées sur les résultats des reconstructions mammaires autologues et par expansion tissulaire

Introduction: In addition to prophylactic mastectomies, BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers are increasingly choosing to undergo risk-reducing procedures such as hysterectomies and salpingo-oophorectomies. Sometimes these surgeries are performed in the same visit as a mastectomy or a revisionary reconstruction procedure. Literature lacks descriptions of complications and trends for these combined surgeries. Methods: Group 1 patients (n = 10, flaps = 20) had abdominal gynecologic procedures at the time of deep inferior epigastric artery perforator flap (DIEP flap) reconstruction. Group 2 patients (n = 29, breasts = 58) had gynecologic procedures at the time of mastectomy and tissue-expander placement. Group 3 patients (n = 141, breasts = 257) had mastectomy and tissue-expander reconstruction without gynecologic procedures and were used as a control group for group 2. Group 4 patients (n = 357, flaps = 673) had autologous breast reconstruction without gynecologic procedures and were used as a control for group 1. Categorical variables such as complications and flap loss were analyzed using χ² tests. Continuous variables such as age, body mass index (BMI), operative time, length of stay were analyzed with 2-tailed t tests. Multivariate analyses were run to control for group differences. Results: Groups 1 and 4 were equivalent in age and comorbidities, except group 1 (32.8 kg/m²) had significantly higher BMI than group 4 (31.4 kg/m²), P =.028. Average operating time was statistically equivalent for group 1 patients (610 minutes) and group 4 patients (503 minutes), P =.289. Average hospital stay was equivalent as well (group 1 = 4.4 days, group 4 = 4.1 days, P =.676). Operative times for group 2 patients (457 minutes) were significantly longer than for group 3 patients (288 minutes), P <.01. Group 2 patients (3 nights) had significantly longer hospital stays than group 3 patients (2 nights), P <.01. Group 1 patients (2/20 flaps, 10%) had a significantly higher rate of flap loss than group 4 patients (8/673 flaps, 1%), P <.01. There were no differences in other flap complications. Additionally, there were no significant differences in postoperative tissue-expander complications between group 2 and group 3. Discussion: Both flap losses in Group 1 patients occurred in a single patient with BMI = 39.3 kg/m² and a personal history of recurrent DVTs. Additionally, the rates of complications across other measures were equivalent between groups. Thus, despite the increased rate of flap loss in Group 1 (10%) vs Group 4 (1.3%), along with the increased operative times and hospital stays, certain patients can be advised that a prophylactic gynecological procedure is safe to combine with breast reconstruction.