4.2 Article

Oncological Safety of Autologous Fat Grafting after Breast Conservative Treatment: A Prospective Evaluation

Journal

BREAST JOURNAL
Volume 20, Issue 2, Pages 159-165

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tbj.12225

Keywords

adipocyte stem cell; autologous fat graft; breast cancer; breast reconstruction; local recurrence

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Autologous fat graft to the breast is a useful tool to correct defects after breast conservative treatment (BCT). Although this procedure gains popularity, little is known about the interaction between the fat graft and the prior oncological environment. Evidences of safety of this procedure in healthy breast and after post-mastectomy reconstruction exist. However, there is paucity of data among patients who underwent BCT which are hypothetically under a higher risk of local recurrence (LR). Fifty-nine patients, with prior BCT, underwent 75 autologous fat graft procedures using the Coleman's technique, between October 2005 and July 2008. Follow-up was made by clinical and radiologic examination at least once, after 6 months of the procedure. Mean age was 50 +/- 8.5 years, and mean follow-up was 34.4 +/- 15.3months. Mean time from oncological surgery to the first fat grafting procedure was 76.6 +/- 30.9months. Most of patients were at initial stage 0 (11.8%), I (33.8%), or IIA (23.7%). Immediate complication was observed in three cases (4%). Only three cases of true LR (4%) associated with the procedure were observed during the follow-up. Abnormal breast images were present in 20% of the postoperative mammograms, and in 8% of the cases, biopsy was warranted. Autologous fat graft is a safe procedure to correct breast defects after BCT, with low postoperative complications. Although it was not associated with increased risk of LR in the group of patients studied, prospective trials are needed to certify that it does not interfere in patient's oncological prognosis.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available