Matthew Barber

Outcome of the use of acellular-dermal matrix to assist implant-based breast reconstruction in a single centre

INTRODUCTION The use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM) has transformed the technique of implant-based breast reconstruction. It offers the option of a one-stage procedure and is felt to have benefits in cosmetic outcome but the medium and long-term outcomes are unknown. METHODS All cases where ADM was used in a breast reconstructive procedure in the Edinburgh Breast Unit from its initial use on 7/7/2008 to 31/7/2012 were reviewed retrospectively. Follow up was completed to 30/11/2012. RESULTS 147 patients received 232 sheets of ADM (156 Strattice, 73 Permacol and 3 Alloderm). Mean follow up was 687 days. In 40 cases unplanned implant explantation occurred (17.2% or 27.2% of patients). 7 of 27 (25.9%) patients requiring adjuvant therapy had this delayed due to problems with the reconstruction. 30 of 80 patients (37.5%) undergoing unilateral surgery have undergone contralateral surgery. Implant loss varied significantly with smoking (34.6% loss rate in smokers vs 13.2% in non-smokers, p = 0.001), with radiotherapy (28.1% loss rate vs 13.8% with no radiotherapy, p = 0.001) and with incision type. There was no statistically significant variation by operating surgeon, type of ADM used, chemotherapy use, patient weight, breast weight or nipple preservation. Patients underwent a mean of 1.54 further operations (range 0-7). CONCLUSIONS While offering potential cosmetic and financial benefits, the use of ADM with implant-based reconstructions has a significant rate of implant loss, further surgery and potential delay in adjuvant therapy. These must be considered when planning treatment and consenting patients.

Comparison of Breast Cancer-Related Lymphedema (Upper Limb Swelling) Prevalence Estimated Using Objective and Subjective Criteria and Relationship with Quality of Life

This study aimed to investigate lymphedema prevalence using three different measurement/diagnostic criterion combinations and explore the relationship between lymphedema and quality of life for each, to provide evaluation of rehabilitation. Cross-sectional data from 617 women attending review appointments after completing surgery, chemotherapy, and radiotherapy included the Morbidity Screening Tool (MST; criterion: yes to lymphedema); Lymphedema and Breast Cancer Questionnaire (LBCQ; criterion: yes to heaviness and/or swelling); percentage limb volume difference (perometer: %LVD; criterion: 10%+ difference); and the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy breast cancer-specific quality of life tool (FACT B+4). Perometry measurements were conducted in a clinic room. Between 341 and 577 participants provided sufficient data for each analysis, with mean age varying from 60 to 62 (SD 9.95–10.03) and median months after treatment from 49 to 51. Lymphedema prevalence varied from 26.2% for perometry %LVD to 20.5% for the MST and 23.9% for the LBCQ; differences were not significant. Limits of agreement analysis between %LVD and the subjective measures showed little consistency, while moderate consistency resulted between the subjective measures. Quality of life differed significantly for women with and without lymphedema only when subjective measurements were used. Results suggest that subjective and objective tools investigate different aspects of lymphedema.