Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Management of contralateral breast following mastectomy and breast reconstruction using a mirror adjustment with crescent mastopexy technique

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Introduction

Heterologous breast reconstruction after mastectomy sometimes requires the management of the contralateral breast to achieve symmetric long lasting aesthetic results. Some techniques could be used for the symmetrization of contralateral breast with or without implants as breast augmentation, reduction mammoplasty, mastopexy, with T inverted, J, vertical, periareolar, semi-circular, or axillary scars. The aim of this study is to present the use of crescent mastopexy technique with implants in contralateral adjustment following monolateral breast reconstruction compared with a control group in which patients underwent other contralateral procedures. We used BREAST-Q to evaluate breast perception and patient’s satisfaction and surgeon-rated aesthetic outcomes were measured using the Kroll evaluation (a global and itemized aesthetic tool).

Materials and methods

A retrospective study was designed. We enrolled in the study 55 patients who had undergone breast reconstruction with implants and contralateral breast symmetrization procedure at our hospital between 2010 and 2016, and they answered to BREAST-Q postoperative module after almost 1 year from breast reconstruction. The study population consisted of 2 groups of women: patient underwent contralateral adjustment with crescent mastopexy and augmentation and patients underwent other contralateral procedures. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive and summary statistics to identify a central tendency between the two groups, we applied Fisher’s exact test to the results to obtain answers 1 year after the last procedure for the two groups.

Results

This cross-sectional study compared two cohorts in which 55 women underwent monolateral mastectomy and breast reconstruction with contralateral adjustment, 15 of these underwent contralateral crescent mastopexy with augmentation, and 40 (control group) underwent contralateral breast adjustment with other mastopexy and augmentation technique (27 patients underwent T inverted mastopexy, 2 J mastopexy, 6 vertical scar mastopexy, 5 periareolar mastopexy). Nineteen patients suffered of co-morbidities (smoking, autoimmune disease, cardiological, neurological, and dismetabolic). All patients answered the postoperative BREAST-Q reconstruction module almost 1 year from last surgical procedure.

Conclusions

In patients with a pseudoptosis or mild ptosis of the contralateral breast, crescent mastopexy could be a valid procedure with minimal scars, better symmetry, and global cosmetic results than other procedures. This is the first study which compares crescent mastopexy with augmentation with other mastopexy procedures. Level III: evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies, preferably from more than one center or research group.

Level (III)

Evidence obtained from well-designed cohort or case–control analytic studies, preferably from more than one center or research group.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gilbert E, Ussher JM, Perz J. Sexuality after breast cancer: a review. Maturitas. 2010;66(4):397–407.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ganz PA, Rowland JH, Desmond K, Meyerowitz BE, Wyatt GE. Life after breast cancer: understanding women’s health- related quality of life and sexual functioning. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(2):501–14.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Burwell SR, Case DL, Kaelin C. Avis NE sexual problems in younger women after breast cancer surgery. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(18):2815–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bertero C, Chamberlain Wilmoth M. Breast cancer diagnosis and its treatment affecting the self: a meta-synthesis. Cancer Nurs. 2007;30(3):194–202 (quiz 203-4).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Torres-Mejía G, Navarro-Lechuga E, Tuesca-Molina RJ, Ángeles-Llerenas A. The epidemiological challenges of breast cancer among premenopausal women in limited resource settings. Rev Investig Clin. 2017;69(2):59–65.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Waljee JF, Hu ES, Ubel PA, Smith DM, Newman LA, Alderman AK. Effect of esthetic outcome after breast-conserving surgery on psychosocial functioning and quality of life. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(20):3331–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Juhl AA, Christensen S, Zachariae R, Damsgaard TE. Unilateral breast reconstruction after mastectomy—patient satisfaction, aesthetic outcome and quality of life. Acta Oncol. 2017;56(2):225–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Rizki H, Nkonde C, Ching RC, Kumiponjera D, Malata CM. Plastic surgical management of the contralateral breast in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction. Int J Surg. 2013;11(9):767–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kashiwagi K, Abe Y, Ishida S, Mineda K, Yamashita Y, Fukunaga Y, Yoshimoto S, Yamato R, Tsuda T, Hashimoto I. Reduction mammaplasty and mastopexy for the contralateral breast after reconstruction surgery following cancer resection: a report of 3 cases. J Med Investig. 2016;63(3–4):281–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Salgarello M, Visconti G, Barone-Adesi L, Franceschini G, Masetti R. Contralateral breast symmetrisation in immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction after unilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy: the tailored reduction/augmentation mammaplasty. Arch Plast Surg. 2015;42(3):302–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM, Klok JA, Cordeiro PG, Cano SJ. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(2):345–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kroll S, Baldwin B. A comparison of outcomes using three different methods of breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1992;90(3):455–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Regnault P. Breast ptosis. Definition and treatment. Clin Plast Surg (1976). 1976;3(2):193–203.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nava MB, Rocco N, Catanuto G, Falco G, Capalbo E, Marano L, Bordoni D, Spano A. Scaperrotta G Impact of contra-lateral breast reshaping on mammographic surveillance in women undergoing breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer. Breast. 2015;24(4):434–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Spear SL, Spittler CJ. Breast reconstruction with implants and expanders. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001;107(1):177–87 (quiz 188).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nava MB, Spano A, Cadenelli P, Colombetti A, Menozzi A, Pennati A, Catanuto G. Extra-projected implants as an alternative surgical model for breast reconstruction. Implantation strategy and early results. Breast. 2008;17(4):361–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Malata CM, McIntosh SA. Purushotam AD immediate breast reconstruction after mastectomy for cancer: review. Br J Surg. 2000;87(11):1455–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rohrich RJ, Thornton JF, Jakubietz RG, Jakubietz MG, Grünert JG. The limited scar mastopexy: current concepts and approaches to correct breast ptosis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;114(6):1622–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Puckett CL, Meyer VH. Reinisch JF (1985) Crescent mastopexy and augmentation. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985;75(4):533–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Holmes DR, Silverstein MJ. Triangle resection with crescent mastopexy: an oncoplastic breast surgical technique for managing inferior pole lesions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(10):3289–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Hidalgo DA, Spector JA. Mastopexy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132(4):642e–56e.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Handel N. Secondary mastopexy in the augmented patient: A recipe for disaster. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118(7 Suppl):152S–63S (discussion 164S-165S, 166S-167S).

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Regnault B. Breast ptosis: definition and treatment. Clin Plast Surg. 1976;3(2):193–203.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Scaperrotta G, Capalbo E, Ferranti C, Falco G, Nava MB, Di Leo G, Marchesini M, Suman L, Panizza P. Mammographic findings after reshaping with autoprosthesis in women undergoing contralateral breast reconstruction and mastectomy. Tumori. 2016;102(1):77–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mauro Barone.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cogliandro, A., Brunetti, B., Barone, M. et al. Management of contralateral breast following mastectomy and breast reconstruction using a mirror adjustment with crescent mastopexy technique. Breast Cancer 25, 94–99 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0796-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-017-0796-6

Keywords

Navigation