Scholarlink

Background <p>In immediate expander/implant reconstruction, postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) can be administered at two different time points: during tissue expander insertion or after exchange with an implant. The optimal timing for PMRT remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PMRT timing on the outcomes of patients with breast cancer undergoing two-stage expander/implant breast reconstruction.</p> Methods <p>A literature review of articles in English and Japanese up to March 2021 was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web. Studies comparing the timing of PMRT in patients with breast cancer undergoing immediate two-stage expander/implant breast reconstructions and PMRT were included. The assessed outcomes included major complications, reconstruction failure, cosmesis, capsular contractures, and local recurrence.</p> Results <p>Eleven studies encompassing 1,628 cases were identified. These included one prospective cohort study, one prospective case–control study, and nine retrospective cohort studies. No significant differences were observed in major complications between PMRT to expander and PMRT to implant (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.72–1.73, <i>P</i> = 0.64). Reconstruction failure was more prevalent in the expander group (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.43–3.82, <i>P</i> = 0.0007), while severe capsular contractures occurred less frequently in the expander group (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12–0.92, <i>P</i> = 0.03).</p> Conclusions <p>PMRT to expander was associated with higher reconstruction failure and lower severe capsular contracture rates, with no significant differences in major complications by timing. There is insufficient evidence to favor one approach over the other.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Timing of postmastectomy radiation therapy in two-stage expander/implant-based breast reconstruction: a systematic review and meta-analysis for the 2022 Japanese breast cancer society clinical practice guideline

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年9月25日

查看全文
  • Mami Ogita,
  • Subaru Sawayanagi,
  • Haruka Jinnouchi,
  • Michio Yoshimura,
  • Chikako Yamauchi,
  • Naoko Sanuki,
  • Yasushi Hamamoto,
  • Kimiko Hirata,
  • Mariko Kawamura,
  • Yutaka Yamamoto,
  • Shigehira Saji,
  • Tatsuya Toyama

摘要

Background

In immediate expander/implant reconstruction, postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) can be administered at two different time points: during tissue expander insertion or after exchange with an implant. The optimal timing for PMRT remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of PMRT timing on the outcomes of patients with breast cancer undergoing two-stage expander/implant breast reconstruction.

Methods

A literature review of articles in English and Japanese up to March 2021 was performed using PubMed/MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Ichushi-Web. Studies comparing the timing of PMRT in patients with breast cancer undergoing immediate two-stage expander/implant breast reconstructions and PMRT were included. The assessed outcomes included major complications, reconstruction failure, cosmesis, capsular contractures, and local recurrence.

Results

Eleven studies encompassing 1,628 cases were identified. These included one prospective cohort study, one prospective case–control study, and nine retrospective cohort studies. No significant differences were observed in major complications between PMRT to expander and PMRT to implant (odds ratio [OR] 1.11, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.72–1.73, P = 0.64). Reconstruction failure was more prevalent in the expander group (OR 2.33, 95% CI 1.43–3.82, P = 0.0007), while severe capsular contractures occurred less frequently in the expander group (OR 0.33, 95% CI 0.12–0.92, P = 0.03).

Conclusions

PMRT to expander was associated with higher reconstruction failure and lower severe capsular contracture rates, with no significant differences in major complications by timing. There is insufficient evidence to favor one approach over the other.