Neurotization in Innervated Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review of Techniques and Outcomes.

Breast flap Breast sensation Flap neurotization Innervated breast reconstruction Nerve coaptation Sensory recovery

Journal

Journal of plastic, reconstructive & aesthetic surgery : JPRAS
ISSN: 1878-0539
Titre abrégé: J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 101264239

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
09 2022
Historique:
received: 25 06 2021
revised: 22 03 2022
accepted: 05 06 2022
pubmed: 26 7 2022
medline: 12 10 2022
entrez: 25 7 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Significant improvements in sensory recovery after innervated breast reconstruction have been reported. However, surgical approaches and sensory testing methods have been widely variable. This systematic review aimed to synthesize neurotization techniques and outcomes in breast reconstruction surgery. A comprehensive literature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify all studies reporting outcomes of neurotization in innervated breast reconstruction. Data extracted from each study included neurotization techniques, operative times, sensory methods and outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. A total of 1,350 articles were identified, and 23 articles were included for analysis. Nerve coaptation was performed in 536 breasts and 419 patients, with techniques consisting of direct coaptation (65.1% of flaps), coaptation with nerve conduit (26.3%), and coaptation with nerve allograft (8.6%). The neural component of operating time ranged from 8 to 38 min, and the pooled neurotization success rate among nine studies that reported this outcome was 90.6% (95% CI: 83.6%-96.0%). Overall, innervated breasts achieved earlier and superior sensory recovery that was more uniformly distributed throughout the flap compared to non-innervated breasts. Despite high heterogeneity between studies, all included studies supported neurotized breast reconstruction to improve the rate, quality, and magnitude of sensory recovery. Neurotization during breast reconstruction may be worth the investment of additional operating time to increase the prospect of high-quality sensory recovery. Further investigation with standardized sensory testing methods and patient-reported outcome tools is needed to definitively support neurotization as a standard of care in breast reconstruction surgery.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND
Significant improvements in sensory recovery after innervated breast reconstruction have been reported. However, surgical approaches and sensory testing methods have been widely variable. This systematic review aimed to synthesize neurotization techniques and outcomes in breast reconstruction surgery.
METHODS
A comprehensive literature search of the MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases was conducted to identify all studies reporting outcomes of neurotization in innervated breast reconstruction. Data extracted from each study included neurotization techniques, operative times, sensory methods and outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes.
RESULTS
A total of 1,350 articles were identified, and 23 articles were included for analysis. Nerve coaptation was performed in 536 breasts and 419 patients, with techniques consisting of direct coaptation (65.1% of flaps), coaptation with nerve conduit (26.3%), and coaptation with nerve allograft (8.6%). The neural component of operating time ranged from 8 to 38 min, and the pooled neurotization success rate among nine studies that reported this outcome was 90.6% (95% CI: 83.6%-96.0%). Overall, innervated breasts achieved earlier and superior sensory recovery that was more uniformly distributed throughout the flap compared to non-innervated breasts. Despite high heterogeneity between studies, all included studies supported neurotized breast reconstruction to improve the rate, quality, and magnitude of sensory recovery.
CONCLUSIONS
Neurotization during breast reconstruction may be worth the investment of additional operating time to increase the prospect of high-quality sensory recovery. Further investigation with standardized sensory testing methods and patient-reported outcome tools is needed to definitively support neurotization as a standard of care in breast reconstruction surgery.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35872020
pii: S1748-6815(22)00321-7
doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2022.06.006
pii:
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Review Systematic Review

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

2890-2913

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Conflict of interest The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose associated with this publication.

Auteurs

Eric Shiah (E)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Elizabeth Laikhter (E)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Carly D Comer (CD)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Samuel M Manstein (SM)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Valeria P Bustos (VP)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Paul A Bain (PA)

Countway Library, Harvard Medical School; 10 Shattuck St., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Bernard T Lee (BT)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115.

Samuel J Lin (SJ)

Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Harvard Medical School; 330 Brookline Ave., Boston, Massachusetts, 02115. Electronic address: sjlin@bidmc.harvard.edu.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH