Immediate breast reconstruction with implants in patients undergoing mastectomy for carcinoma – review article

Czech version

Authors: K. Rošetzká; M. Patzelt; A. Sukop
Authors‘ workplace: Klinika plastické chirurgie 3. LF UK a FN Královské Vinohrady, Praha
Published in: Rozhl. Chir., 2026, roč. 105, č. 2, s. 80-85.
Category: Review
doi: https://doi.org/10.48095/ccrvch202680

Overview

Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) with implants has become an integral part of comprehensive care for patients undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer. This review summarizes current evidence on indications, contraindications, surgical techniques, complications, and clinical outcomes of IBR with an implant. Properly selected patients benefit from enhanced psychological well-being, shorter recovery, and improved cosmetic results.

IBR is primarily indicated in women with stage T1–T2 tumors without metastases. Contraindications include advanced disease, the requirement for adjuvant radiotherapy, comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus, obesity, or smoking, and poor skin flap quality. The most widely used surgical approach is the direct-to-implant (DTI) technique, allowing definitive reconstruction in a single operation.

Potential complications include infection, seroma, capsular contracture, skin necrosis, and implant exposure. Their incidence depends on tissue quality, surgical expertise, and patient-related risk factors. Current studies demonstrate that IBR does not adversely affect oncologic safety nor delay adjuvant treatment. In addition, IBR has been shown to be cost-effective and to yield high patient satisfaction, particularly in domains of body image, sexuality, and psychosocial adjustment.

In conclusion, IBR with implants represents a safe and effective reconstructive option for appropriately selected patients.

Keywords:

Mastectomy – breast carcinoma – breast implant – immediate breast reconstruction

Sources

1. Jeevan R. Reconstructive surgery after mastectomy for breast cancer: National cohort study of patterns of care and outcomes. Br J Surg 2012; 99(4): 469–475. doi: 10.1002/bjs.8681.

2. Cohen M, Bouteille C, Houvenaeghel GF. Oncoplasty and immediate breast reconstruction. Bull Cancer 2025; 112(7–8): 878–892. doi: 10.1016/j.bulcan.2025.02.026.

3. Jagsi R, Jiang J, Momoh AO et al. Trends and variation in use of breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32(9): 919–926. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.52.2284.

4. Albornoz CR, Bach PB, Mehrara BJ et al. A paradigm shift in US breast reconstruction: increasing implant rates. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 131(1): 15–23. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3182729cde.

5. Al-Ghazal SK, Sully L, Fallowfield L et al. The psychological impact of immediate rather than delayed breast reconstruction. Eur J Surg Oncol 2000; 26(1): 17–19. doi: 10.1053/ejso.1999.0753.

6. Qureshi AA, Odom EB, Parikh RP et al. Patient-reported outcomes of aesthetics and satisfaction in immediate breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy with implants and fat grafting. Aesthet Surg J 2017; 37(9): 999–1008. doi: 10.1093/asj/sjw266.

7. NCCN. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer. 2025 [online]. Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/ breast.pdf.

8. de Boniface J. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy for breast cancer. Lancet Oncol 2021; 22(8): e328–e337. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00221-5.

9. Momoh AO. Patient selection in immediate breast reconstruction: evaluation of contraindications and risk factors. Plast Reconstr Surg 2014; 134(6): 1047–1056. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000000715.

10. Lisa A, Riccardi F, Alessandri-Bonetti M et al. Outcomes, indications and predictive factors of complications in postmastectomy prepectoral breast reconstructions with polyurethane foam-coated implants. Breast 2025; 83 : 104520. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2025.104520.

11. Sbitany H. Prepectoral Breast reconstruction: a safe, sound, and oncologically appropriate approach. Plast Reconstr Surg 2020; 146(4): 471e–480e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000007173.

12. Verdial FC, Anderman KJ, Daly AE et al. The age-old question in nipple -⁠ -sparing mastectomy: is older age a contraindication? Ann Surg Oncol 2025; 32(4): 2569–2577. doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-16741-4.

13. Petit JY, Veronesi U, Orecchia R et al. Immediate breast reconstruction in oncologic surgery: facts and controversies. Ann Oncol 2020; 31(2): 168–175. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz330.

14. Lohasammakul S, Flor M, Reddy S et al. Autoderm in prepectoral breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2025; 13(5): e5487. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000005487.

15. Hölmich LR, Sayegh F, Salzberg CA. Immediate or delayed breast reconstruction: the aspects of timing, anarrative review. Ann Breast Surg 2023; 7(6): 1–9. doi: 10.21037/abs-21-44.

16. Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL, Disa JJ et al. Irradiation after immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: outcomes, complications, aesthetic results, and satisfaction among 156 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113(3): 877–881. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000105689.84930.e5.

17. Barry M, Kell MR. Comorbidities affecting outcomes in immediate breast reconstruction. Breast 2021; 55 : 105–109. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.11.005.

18. Sbitany H. Perfusion and flap viability in nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2022; 149(4): 744e–754e. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008901.

19. Komorowska-Timek E, Gurtner GC. Intraoperative perfusion mapping with laser-assisted indocyanine green imaging can predict and prevent complications in immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2010; 125(4): 1065–1073. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181d17f80.

20. Salzberg CA. Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 2012; 39(2): 119–126. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2012.01.001.

21. Lohasammakul S, Flor M, Reddy S et al. Autoderm in direct-to-implant prepectoral breast reconstruction decreases perioperative complication rates and improves reconstructive outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2025; 13(5): e6722. doi: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000006722.

22. Jagsi R, Momoh AO, Qi J et al. Surgical options in immediate breast reconstruction: results of a National prospective study of patient-reported outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol 2023; 30(1): 42–53. doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-12604-7.

23. Srinivasa DR, Hanson SE, Tucker A et al. Direct-to-implant versus two-stage tissue expander/implant reconstruction: 2-year risks and patient-reported outcomes from a prospective, multicenter study. Plast Reconstr Surg 2017; 140(5): 869–877. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003748.

24. Nahabedian MY. Managing surgical complications in implant-based breast reconstruction. Clin Plast Surg 2011; 38(4): 569–580. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.06.005.

25. Zhang Y, Du F, Zeng A et al. Direct-to -⁠ -implant and tissue expander-based immediate breast reconstruction in Chinese women: a comparison of surgical complications and patient-reported outcomes. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2025; 100 : 131–143. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2024.09.053.

26. Mimoso A, Jeffery H, Malik M et al. Rates of skin and nipple necrosis with inframammary fold approach in nipple-sparing mastectomy: a 5-year retrospective single-centre study. Br J Surg 2025; 112(Suppl 10): znaf128.334. doi: 10.1093/bjs/znaf128.334.

27. Kooijman MML, Hage JJ, Scholten AN et al. Advantages of immediate implant-based breast reconstruction over delayed breast reconstruction in women treated with postmastectomy radiotherapy for breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2025; 212(1): 37–46. doi: 10.1007/s10549-025-07690-x.

28. Alderman AK, Hawley ST, Waljee J et al. Understanding the impact of breast reconstruction on the surgical decision-making process for breast cancer. Cancer 2008; 112(3): 489–494. doi: 10.1002/cncr.23214.

29. Eriksson M, Frisell J, Wickman M et al. Immediate reconstruction after mastectomy for invasive breast cancer does not affect recurrence or survival. Breast 2011; 20(6): 539–545. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2011.05.015.

30. Cordeiro PG, Pusic AL, Disa JJ et al. Irradiation after immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: outcomes, complications, aesthetic results, and satisfaction among 156 patients. Plast Reconstr Surg 2004; 113(3): 877–881. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000100805.92676.CA.

31. Chatterjee A, Pyfer BJ, Czerniecki BJ et al. Early postoperative outcomes in breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with and without reconstruction: a comparison of matched cohorts. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23(1): 187–193. doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4863-6.

32. Casella D, Di Taranto G, Marcasciano M et al. Subpectoral versus prepectoral breast reconstruction: a literature review. Ann Med Surg (Lond) 2020; 49 : 44–49. doi: 10.1016/j.amsu.2019.11.013.

33. Kruper L, Holt A, Xu X et al. Disparities in reconstruction rates after mastectomy: patterns of care and factors associated with the use of breast reconstruction in Southern California. Ann Surg Oncol 2011; 18(8): 2158–2165. doi: 10.1245/s10434-011-1580-z.

34. Spear SL, Willey SC, Feldman ED et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for prophylactic and therapeutic indications. Plast Reconstr Surg 2011; 128(5): 1005–1014. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e31822b66d2.

35. Zhong T, Hu J, Bagher S et al. Decision regret following breast reconstruction: the role of self-efficacy and satisfaction with information in the preoperative period. Plast Reconstr Surg 2013; 132(2): 257–264. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318295891c.

36. Cordeiro PG, McCarthy CM. A single surgeon’s 12-year experience with tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction: part II. An analysis of long-term complications, aesthetic outcomes, and patient satisfaction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006; 118(4): 832–839. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000232363.82401.e8.

37. Hansen L, Sørensen JA, Jørgensen MG et al. Acellular dermal matrix in direct -⁠ -to-implant breast reconstruction: univariate and multivariate analysis on potential risk factors. Eur J Plast Surg 2024; 47(35).

38. Lee CN, Deal AM, Huh R et al. Quality of patient decisions about breast reconstruction after mastectomy. JAMA Surg 2017; 152(8): 741–748. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2017.0685.

39. Pusic AL, Matros E, Fine N et al. Patient -⁠ -reported outcomes 1 year after immediate breast reconstruction: results of the mastectomy reconstruction outcomes consortium study. J Clin Oncol 2017; 35(22): 2499–2506. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2016.69.9561.

40. Pusic AL, Klassen AF, Scott AM et al. Development of a new patient-reported outcome measure for breast surgery: the BREAST-Q. Plast Reconstr Surg 2009; 124(2): 345–353. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181aee807.

41. Lipa JE, Yao KA, Petrek JA et al. Patient involvement in the decision-making process improves satisfaction in breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2003; 111(2): 708–713. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000041486.28011.BA.