Minimally invasive mastectomy: minimal incisions for better aesthetic quality of breast reconstruction

Background: Women with a family history of breast cancer who develop this disease are confronted with important situations regarding the increased risk for development of a second cancer in the contralateral breast. Prophylactic contralateral mastectomy (PCM) reduces by approximately 95% the risk for contralateral breast cancer. In spite of an increase in indications for PCM, the technical difficulties are many regarding the accomplishment of these procedures. The aim of this study is to describe the technique of mastectomy with preservation of the nipple-areola complex and a small incision, reducing surgical difficulties and complications attributed to this technique, thus allowing better aesthetic results in breast reconstruction. Methods: Forty-six patients with indications for PCM (28 bilateral) were submitted to minimally invasive mastectomy from March 2005 to November 2007. A small incision in the superior pole of the areola, sufficient to pass a liposuction 4 mm cannula is made. With the help of this cannula, detachment of the skin from the gland tissue is performed. Then a 3.5 to 4.5-cm long incision in the inframammary fold is made. Glandular detachment is completed using cautery in the sub,glandular portion and scissors in the upper breast portion cutting the restraints left by the cannula. The mammary gland tissue is removed through this incision. Results: Seventy-four breasts were operated on. The resected breast mass ranged from 285 g to 475 g. All 43 patients were reconstructed with prostheses. There was no necrosis of the nipple-areola complex or of the skin. Conclusions: This technique is an option for cases of patients with indications for PCM.

Mastectomy; Minimally invasive; Breast cancer; Prophylactic contralateral mastectomy

[1] Frost M.H., Slezak J.M., Tran N.V.; Williams C.I., Johnson J.L., Woods J.E. et al.: “Satisfaction after contralateral prophylactic mastectomy: the significance of mastectomy type, reconstructive complications, and body appearance”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2005, 23, 7849.

[2] Verhoog L.C., Brekelmans C.T., Seynaeve C., van den Bosch L.M., Dahmen G., van Geel A.N. et al.: “Survival and tumour characteristics of breast-cancer patients with germline mutations of BRCA1”. Lancet, 1998, 351, 316.

[3] Verhoog L.C., Brekelmans C.T., Seynaeve C., Dahmen G., van Geel A.N., Bartels C.C. et al.: “Survival in hereditary breast cancer associated with germline mutations of BRCA2”. J. Clin. Oncol., 1999, 17, 3396.

[4] Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium: “Cancer risks in BRCA2 mutation carriers: The Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium”. J. Natl. Cancer Inst., 1999, 91, 1310.

[5] Verhoog L.C., Brekelmans C.T., Seynaeve C., Meijers-Heijboer E.J., Klijn J.G.: “Contralateral breast cancer risk is influenced by the age at onset in BRCA1-associated breast cancer”. Br. J. Cancer, 2000, 83, 384.

[6] Gerber B., Krause A., Küchenmeister I., Reimer T., Makovitzky J., Kundt G., Friese K.: “Skin sparing mastectomy with autologous immediate reconstruction: oncological risks and aesthetic results”. Zentralbl. Gynakol., 2000, 122, 476.

[7] Gerber B., Krause A., Reimer T., Müller H., Küchenmeister I., Makovitzky J. et al.: “Skin-sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure”. Ann. Surg., 2003, 238, 120.

[8] Kang S.H., Lee S.J., Kwun K.B.: “Early results of nipple-areolasparing subcutaneous mastectomy: in comparison with conventional subcutaneous mastectomy”. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2004, 88, 210.

[9] Toth B.A., Lappert P.: “Modified skin incisions for mastectomy: the need for plastic surgical input in preoperative planning”. Plast. Reconstr. Surg., 1991, 87, 1048.

[10] Narreddy S.R., Govindarajulu S., Shere M., Ibrahim N., Cawthorn S.J.: “Accuracy of subareolar mammotome biopsy in preoperative accuracy of preoperative subareolar mammotome biopsy in subcutaneous mastectomy with or without nipple preservation”. Breast 7240”. Br. J. Sur., 2005, 92, 30.

[11] Peralta E.A., Ellenhorn J.D., Wagman L.D., Dagis A., Andersen J.S., Chuz D.Z. et al.: “Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy improves de outcome of selected patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer”. Am. J. Surg., 2000, 180, 439.

[12] Herrinton L.J., Barlow W.E., Yu O., Geiger A.M., Elmor J.G., Barton M.B., Harris E.L.: “Efficacy of prophylactic mastectomy in women with unilateral breast cancer: a cancer research network project”. J. Clin. Oncol., 2005, 23, 4275.