Predicting Complications in Breast Reconstruction

Importance Necrosis of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) is the Achilles heel of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), and it can be difficult to assess which patients are at risk of this complication (Ann Surg Oncol 2014;21(1):100–106). Objective To develop and validate a model that accurately predicts NAC necrosis in a prospective cohort. Design Data were collected from a retrospectively reviewed cohort of patients who underwent NSM and immediate breast reconstruction between January 2015 and July 2019 at our institution, a high -volume, tertiary academic center. Preoperative clinical characteristics, operative variables, and postoperative complications were collected and linked to NAC outcomes. These results were utilized to train a random-forest classification model to predict necrosis. Our model was then validated in a prospective cohort of patients undergoing NSM with immediate breast reconstruction between June 2020 and June 2021. Results Model predictions of NAC necrosis in the prospective cohort achieved an accuracy of 97% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89–0.99; P = 0.009). This was consistent with the accuracy of predictions in the retrospective cohort (0.97; 95% CI, 0.95–0.99). A high degree of specificity (0.98; 95% CI, 0.90–1.0) and negative predictive value (0.98; 95% CI, 0.90–1.0) were also achieved prospectively. Implant weight was the most predictive of increased risk, with weights greater than 400 g most strongly associated with NAC ischemia. Conclusions and Relevance Our machine learning model prospectively predicted cases of NAC necrosis with a high degree of accuracy. An important predictor was implant weight, a modifiable risk factor that could be adjusted to mitigate the risk of NAC necrosis and associated postoperative complications.

[1]  R. Shammas,et al.  An Ounce of Prediction is Worth a Pound of Cure: Risk Calculators in Breast Reconstruction , 2022, Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open.

[2]  Barbara L. Smith,et al.  Risk of Developing Breast Reconstruction Complications: A Machine-Learning Nomogram for Individualized Risk Estimation with and without Postmastectomy Radiation Therapy , 2021, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[3]  B. Mehrara,et al.  Towards Patient-centered Decision-making in Breast Cancer Surgery , 2021, Annals of surgery.

[4]  James A. Butterworth,et al.  Do Nipple Necrosis Rates Differ in Prepectoral Versus Submuscular Implant-Based Reconstruction After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy? , 2020, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[5]  S. Lau,et al.  Predicting Ischemic Complications in the Inframammary Approach to Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: The Midclavicular-to–Inframammary Fold Measurement , 2020, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[6]  M. Morrow,et al.  Increase in Utilization of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Breast Cancer: Indications, Complications, and Oncologic Outcomes , 2019, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[7]  D. Daar,et al.  Is There a Preferred Incision Location for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis , 2019, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[8]  Jonathan M. Bekisz,et al.  Ischemic Complications after Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: Predictors of Reconstructive Failure in Implant-based Reconstruction and Implications for Decision-making , 2019, Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open.

[9]  M. Morrow,et al.  A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcomes After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Conventional Mastectomy with Reconstruction , 2018, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[10]  John T. Stranix,et al.  Evolution in Monitoring of Free Flap Autologous Breast Reconstruction after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Is There a Best Way? , 2018, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[11]  Barbara L. Smith,et al.  Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Women with Breast Cancer. , 2017, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[12]  G. Corso,et al.  Nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy: Review of aims, oncological safety and contraindications. , 2017, Breast.

[13]  M. Senthil,et al.  Outcomes of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Role of Anatomic Measurements , 2016, The American surgeon.

[14]  M. Alperovich,et al.  “Breast in a Day”: Examining Single-Stage Immediate, Permanent Implant Reconstruction in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy , 2016, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[15]  C. Patronella,et al.  The Delay Fill Technique: A Safer Approach to Combination Augmentation Mastopexy , 2015, Seminars in Plastic Surgery.

[16]  Barbara L. Smith,et al.  Breast Reconstruction Outcomes after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Radiation Therapy , 2015, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[17]  Barbara L. Smith,et al.  Breast Reconstruction following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Predictors of Complications, Reconstruction Outcomes, and 5-Year Trends , 2014, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[18]  T. Lam,et al.  Silicone Breast Implants Are Thicker than Water , 2013, Plastic and reconstructive surgery. Global open.

[19]  H. Moyer,et al.  Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Technical Aspects and Aesthetic Outcomes , 2012, Annals of plastic surgery.

[20]  M. Nahabedian,et al.  Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Prophylactic and Therapeutic Indications , 2011, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[21]  J. Frey,et al.  The Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Compared to Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Healing after Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy , 2017, Plastic and reconstructive surgery.

[22]  P. Garvey Breast Reconstruction following Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Predictors of Complications, Reconstruction Outcomes, and 5-Year Trends , 2014 .

[23]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[24]  L. Breiman Random Forests , 2001, Machine Learning.

[25]  R. C. Weast CRC Handbook of Chemistry and Physics , 1973 .