Autologous Reconstruction After Failed Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction: A Comparative Multifactorial Outcome Analysis.

Introduction: Failure of an implant-based breast reconstruction often requires a change to an autologous procedure (salvage autologous breast reconstruction [Salv-ABR]). The aim of this study was to compare surgical and patient-reported outcomes of Salv-ABR to immediate or delayed-immediate ABR (I/DI-ABR), which has hardly been addressed in the existing literature.

Methods: All patients undergoing Salv- or I/DI-ABR between January 2014 and December 2020 were asked to participate in this study. Complication rates, the aesthetic outcome (5-point Likert scale), and quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 and -BR23, Breast-Q, Center for Epidemiology Studies Depression Scale) were compared between both procedures.

Results: Seventy patients participated in the study (Salv-ABR: n = 23; mean ± SD age, 53.5 ± 9.1 years; follow-up, 28.6 ± 18.5 month; I/DI-ABR: n = 45, mean ± SD age: 50.2 ± 7.3 years; follow-up, 32.8 ± 18.5 month). Main indication for Salv-ABR was a major capsular contracture (n = 14 [60.1%]). Early unplanned reoperation rates were significantly increased in the Salv-ABR (56.5% vs 14.9%; P < 0.01). Patients with I/DI-ABR showed a significantly improved overall aesthetic outcome (2.7 ± 0.9 vs 3.3 ± 0.7; P < 0.01) and scored significantly higher in several subscales of EORTC QLQ-C30/BR23 (Global Health Status, Role Functioning, Body Image; P < 0.05) and the Breast-Q (Psychosocial Well-being, Satisfaction with Breast; P < 0.05) compared with patients with Salv-ABR.

Conclusions: Salvage ABR is associated with a higher complication rate, compromised aesthetic outcome, and quality of life compared with I/DI-ABR. This should be considered and discussed with the patient when planning any kind of reconstructive breast surgery.