RADIOTHERAPY AND BREAST RECONSTRUCTION: A META-ANALYSIS
M Barry and M.R. Kell.
Department of Breast Surgery, BreastCheck, Mater Misericordiae University
Hospital, Dublin. Ireland.
Address Correspondence to:
Malcolm R. Kell
Department of Breast Surgery,
Mater Misericordiae University Hospital,
Keywords: Postmastectomy radiotherapy, immediate and delayed breast
reconstruction, prosthetic breast reconstruction, autologous breast
reconstruction, postoperative morbidity.
Introduction: The optimum sequencing of breast reconstruction (BR) in patients
receiving postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) is controversial.
Methods: A comprehensive search of published studies that examined
postoperative morbidity following immediate or delayed breast reconstruction
with combined radiotherapy was performed. Medical (MEDLINE & EMBASE)
databases were searched and cross-referenced for appropriate studies where
morbidity following BR was the primary outcome measured.
Results: 1,105 patients were identified from 11 appropriately selected studies.
Patients undergoing PMRT and BR are more likely to suffer morbidity compared
to patients not receiving PMRT ((OR) = 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4-7.2(no PMRT vs.
PMRT)). Reconstruction technique was also examined with outcome when
PMRT was delivered after BR and this demonstrated that autologous
reconstruction is associated with less morbidity in this setting ((OR) = 0.21; (95%
CI, 0.1-0.4 (autologous vs. implant based)). Delaying BR until after PMRT had no
significant effect on outcome ((OR) =0.87; 95% CI, 0.47-1.62 (delayed vs.
Conclusions: PMRT has a detrimental effect on BR outcome. These results
suggest that where immediate reconstruction is undertaken with the necessity of
PMRT, an autologous flap results in less morbidity when compared to implant
Breast conservation surgery provides excellent locoregional control with
improved quality of life when compared with mastectomy . However many
patients still require mastectomy as the optimum therapeutic cancer procedure,
and many opt to undergo immediate breast reconstruction . It is therefore
essential that an appropriate strategy be proposed regarding the timing of
reconstruction and postoperative radiotherapy. The enthusiasm for post-
mastectomy breast reconstruction aims to achieve good functional aesthetic
outcome and maintain their quality of life, without negatively affecting the
prognosis or detection of cancer recurrence .
The Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group, 82b and 82c, trials in conjunction
with findings from the Canadian trial, collectively demonstrate that patients
randomised to receive post-mastectomy radiation have a lower 10-year rate of
local regional recurrence and an additional survival advantage associated
with post-mastectomy radiotherapy [4, 5]. Based on these, and similar
studies, there are now clear guidelines regarding the indications for post-
mastectomy radiation which are; large tumour size, direct involvement of the
skin, and 4 or more metastatic axillary lymph nodes [6-8]. However, despite
reducing loco-regional recurrences and increasing disease-free survival , post
mastectomy radiotherapy may negatively affect reconstruction outcome.
As a consequence, several studies have demonstrated that immediate breast
reconstructions in irradiated patients are associated with the potential for
significant postoperative morbidity [10, 11]. As a result, breast reconstruction
may be delayed until the final pathological results are available from the
mastectomy specimen and the indication for radiotherapy can be established.
Immediate breast reconstruction without radiotherapy, offers enhanced
aesthetic and safe oncological outcomes, is more cost-effective and
provides a positive psychological effect [12-16]. Despite this, less than 20%
of patients having a mastectomy have immediate breast reconstruction in
the United States . This may be due to patient choice or possibly
apprehension on the part of the surgeon that radiotherapy maybe required
postoperatively which potentially could compromise the reconstruction.
Radiotherapy can cause unpredictable changes in all tissues and
prosthetic materials . It has a biphasic nature with the acute effects
occurring over days to weeks and a delayed response, which can occur
from months to years after completion of the therapy . The acute phase
usually involves acute inflammatory changes which may lead to
desquamation or even necrosis of tissue . The delayed phase involves
atrophy, fibrosis and inhibition of normal wound healing mechanisms .
Furthermore, opponents of immediate breast reconstruction, suggest it
may alter chest wall anatomy and therefore distort the geometrics of the
radiation field design leading to under/overdosing the targeted and
underlying tissues [20, 21]. However, Stralman et al demonstrated a loco-
regional recurrence rate of 6% in 100 patients who had a mastectomy with
immediate (implant/autologous) reconstruction followed by radiotherapy
with a mean follow up of 108+/- 26 months. This suggests, there is no
significant decrease in efficacy or delivery of radiation post-immediate
implant or autologous reconstruction . Furthermore, Huang et al,
compared the incidence of local recurrence and distant metastasis of post-
mastectomy radiotherapy for breast cancer patients with and without
immediate TRAM flap reconstruction. They reported no statistical
differences in the incidences of locoregional recurrence or distant
metastasis between the TRAM flap and the non-TRAM flap patients .
Therefore, the objective of this meta-analysis is to examine the published
evidence on whether patients requiring post-mastectomy radiotherapy should
have an immediate or delayed reconstruction and whether a prosthesis or
autologous reconstruction is associated with the optimum outcome in terms of
Identification of studies
MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched by entering the following in the
searching algorithm: breast reconstruction AND (surgery OR radiation) AND
(clinical trial OR randomized controlled trial OR double-blind OR single-blind OR
random OR randomized OR placebo OR retrospective study OR prospective
study). English was set as a language restriction. The latest search was
performed on January 1, 2010. Two authors (M.B. and M.R.K.) independently
examined the title and abstract of citations and the full texts of potentially eligible
trials were obtained and disagreements were resolved by discussion.
All trials whether randomized or non-randomized, prospective or retrospective
were eligible that examined the effects of radiotherapy on immediate or delayed
breast reconstruction using either a prosthesis or autologous tissue (Latissimus
Dorsi (LD) or Trasversus Rectus Abdominis Muscle (TRAM). Case series or
reports were not included. Studies where the data could not be accurately
extracted were also excluded.
Data Extraction and Outcomes
The following information regarding each eligible trial was recorded: authors’
names, journal, patient numbers, timing and method of reconstruction, addition of
radiotherapy and the post-operative complication rate. The primary end point of
this meta-analysis was postoperative morbidity including capsular contracture,
fibrosis, fat necrosis, surgical site infections requiring removal of prosthesis/re-
operation (see tables 2, 4 and 6).
For post-operative complications in each study, the odds ratio (O.R.) of the
simple proportions of events was estimated with its variance and 95% CI.
Heterogeneity between the O.R.s for the same outcome between studies was
assessed by use of the X2 – based Q statistic . Data were then combined
across studies by the use of general variance methods with fixed and random
effects models . Analyses were conducted using StatsDirect version 2.5.6
(StatsDirect Ltd, Chesire, United Kingdom) and SPSS version 12.0 (SPSS, Inc,
Chicago, IL). All statistical tests were two tailed.
20 potentially eligible studies were identified that examined the effects of
radiotherapy on immediate or delayed breast reconstructions. 9 studies were
excluded from the meta-analysis due to low numbers (e.g. n < 15) or
incomplete data set regarding postoperative morbidity. Of the 11 studies
selected, 4 were studies that examined the effects of RT on immediate BR using
implant or expanders. 4 were studies that examined the effects of RT on
immediate BR using either a prosthesis or autologous flap. Finally 4 remaining
studies evaluated the effects of RT on immediate versus delayed autologous BR.
(See Consort flow of study selection (Figure 1)).
A total of 1,105 patients were identified from 11 selected studies [10, 11, 15,
22, 25-31]. These were subsequently divided into 3 cohorts for subgroup
analyses. The first group (n = 424) were patients’ with immediate BR using a
prosthesis alone with/without RT. The second subgroup (n = 380) compared
patients with immediate autologous BR versus prosthesis alone in the presence
of RT. The last subgroup analysis (n = 301) compared the effects of RT on
immediate versus delayed autologous BR.
Postoperative complications in BR in the presence of RT
Patients undergoing PMRT and immediate BR (n = 196) are more likely to suffer
morbidity when compared to patients not receiving PMRT (n = 229) ((OR) = 4.2;
95% CI, 2.4-7.2(no PMRT vs. PMRT) see figure 2.). Finally reconstruction
technique was examined when PMRT was delivered after BR and this
demonstrated that autologous reconstruction is the superior reconstruction
technique in terms of postoperative morbidity ((OR) = 0.20; (95% CI, 0.1-0.4
(autologous vs. implant based) see figure 3). Postoperative morbidity was
defined in terms of capsular contracture, infection, fat necrosis, fibrosis
and the necessity to re-operate on the patient. The rates of these
complications are displayed in tables 2, 4 and 6. Interestingly, the effect of
delaying BR until after PMRT had no significant effect on outcome ((OR) =0.87;
95% CI, 0.47-1.62 (delayed vs. immediate) see figure 4.).
The findings of this meta-analysis, that an immediate BR using a prosthesis only
in the presence of RT is associated with an increased risk of postoperative
complications ((OR) = 4.2; 95% CI, 2.4-7.2(no PMRT vs. PMRT)), is supported
by Aschermann et al, who conducted a retrospective review of 104 patients (123
breasts) who underwent mastectomy followed by implant breast reconstruction
and demonstrated that complications requiring prosthetic device removal or
replacement, as well as total complications, were more frequent in breasts that
received radiation than breasts that did not (18.5 percent versus 4.2 percent for
complications requiring prosthetic removal or replacement, p < or = 0.025, and
40.7 percent versus 16.7 percent for total complications, p < or = 0.01) . On
analysis of table 1 and 2 below, it is apparent that patients with immediate
implant based reconstructions, receiving radiotherapy have significantly greater
incidences of complications, compared to those who did not receive
Immediate breast reconstruction following a skin-sparing mastectomy has a
number of advantages over the delayed reconstruction. Firstly, it provides a more
enhanced aesthetic result due to preservation of the infra-mammary fold,
allowing a more natural appearance and there is also the option to adjust the
position of the scar . More importantly for the patient, it provides enormous
psychosocial benefits by restoring femininity and improving vitality, sexuality and
quality of life . In the absence of implants, immediate breast reconstruction
has a very favourable morbidity profile even when exposed to adjuvant
radiotherapy . Moreover, it is oncologically safe with an acceptable local
recurrence rate . Despite this, advocates of delayed breast reconstruction
suggest that there are two main problems with immediate breast reconstruction
in the presence of radiotherapy. Firstly, radiation therapy can adversely affect the
cosmetic outcome and cause increased postoperative complications .
Secondly, immediate breast reconstruction can impair the efficacy and delivery of
radiotherapy . Autologous reconstructions have a more predictable response
than implants to radiotherapy however the exact sequencing of this therapy is
contentious. Kronowitz et al, suggested the concept of the delayed-immediate
breast reconstruction as a potential solution . This involves placing a tissue
expander at the time of a skin-sparing mastectomy and waiting for the final
pathological results of the specimen. If radiotherapy is not required, an
immediate reconstruction is proposed and if radiotherapy is required, a delayed
reconstruction is advised. Unfortunately, this requires two operations, which are
associated with significant psychological and cost implications.
McKeown et al, demonstrated that patient satisfaction with cosmetic outcome
was similar between patients undergoing immediate and delayed reconstruction
(autologous LD) plus radiotherapy . Interestingly, they also noted that most
patients in retrospect would have preferred an immediate reconstruction . In a
prospective study by Thomson that assessed 73 women post immediate
implant–assisted LD or autologous LD reconstruction with or without
radiotherapy, there was no difference between the groups in terms of overall
cosmetic outcome as determined by the patients. When a panel of independent
cosmetic assessors reviewed the photographic evidence at different intervals
over a defined time period, they concluded that while radiotherapy had an
adverse effect on aesthetic outcome (p=0.0002) this was more obvious in the
implant-assisted LD group .
Kroll and colleagues, reviewed 1,384 free-flap procedures performed for
reconstruction of the breast or of head and neck defects. They assessed the
effects of prior irradiation of the recipient site on the incidence of total flap loss
which were more common in flaps transferred to previously irradiated sites .
It is evident from this study (table 5 and 6) that exposure of an autologous flap to
radiotherapy increases the postoperative complication rates irrespective of
whether an immediate or delayed reconstruction is performed (30.1% versus
The potential limitations of this study are that patient selection criteria for
either prosthetic-based or autologous BR were poorly defined and may
have differed between centers and time periods. There was also variation in
the RT treatments used in terms of both dose and use of a boost. It is
possible that the incidence of postoperative BR complication rates varies
with the dose of RT used and this could not be assessed in our analysis.
Finally, in addition to selecting the appropriate timing of radiotherapy and
reconstruction, appropriate patient selection is also paramount to consistently
obtain successful outcomes. A BMI of less than 30 is associated with a better
outcome in all reconstructive surgical procedures . A history of smoking and
diabetes are also poor prognostic indicators for myocutaneous flap viability .
Patient selection for reconstruction was not stated in many of the studies
involved in this meta-analysis and therefore could not be included.
Post-mastectomy radiation, irrespective of the method of reconstruction,
increases the incidence of postoperative complications however, this study
has demonstrated that in this setting, an autologous flap offers a more
favourable outcome in terms of morbidity than expander/implant
reconstruction. There is a paucity of high quality conclusive data regarding the
correct sequencing of breast reconstruction and radiotherapy. The majority of
studies involve small numbers of patients in single centres with retrospective
anaylsis. Multicenter randomised controlled trials with longer follow-up times and
better specified parameters are necessary to validate any future strategies
regarding the optimum timing of radiotherapy and breast reconstruction.
Unfortunately, these studies are difficult to perform, as it is difficult to ethically
justify demanding that patients undergo an immediate versus a delayed
reconstructive procedure due to a randomisation process. Therefore, in the
absence of level I evidence, the current data suggests that immediate breast
reconstruction with PMRT may be undertaken though morbidity is higher with
either immediate or delayed technique. The timing and effect of radiotherapy on
breast reconstruction must be discussed to ensure informed opinion and consent
of the patient. The patient’s expectations, preferences, motivations as well as
their level of understanding should be explored to enhance postoperative
satisfaction and quality of life .
Figure 1. Quorom diagram: Consort flow of study selection.
20 studies of BR +
9 studies excluded
due to insufficient
11 studies of BR +
4 studies of BR +
7 studies of BR
flaps + RT
4 studies of implant
flaps + RT.
3 studies comparing
flap recon + RT.
Table 1. Effect of radiotherapy on immediate implant/expander based breast
Author TOR Patient
MOR Radiotherapy Complications
Tallet  Immediate 55 Implant Yes 51%
Immediate 22 Implant No 14%
Immediate 19 Implant/Ex Yes 68%
Immediate 62 Implant/Ex No 31%
Immediate 81 Implant/Ex Yes 68%
Immediate 75 Implant/Ex No 40%
Immediate 41 Implant Yes 19.5%
Immediate 69 Implant No 0%
TOTAL Immediate 196 Implant/Ex Yes 51.6%
TOTAL Immediate 228 Implant/Ex No 21.2%
TOR = timing of reconstruction, MOR = Method of reconstruction, Ex =
Expander, cc = capsular contraction.
Table 2: Postoperative complications in patients undergoing immediate
breast reconstruction with an expander/implant with or without post-
Author MOR Patients RT CC % Inf. % Nec. % Reop%
E/I 55 Yes 29% 9% 12.7% 3.6%
22 No 0% 9% 0% 4.5%
E/I 19 Yes 26% 37% N/A 37%
62 No 10% 19% N/A 8%
E/I 81 Yes 1.2% 3.7% N/A 5%
75 No 3.7% 0.9% N/A 0.7%
E/I 41 Yes 19.5% N/A N/A N/A
69 No 0% N/A N/A N/A
MOR = Method of reconstruction, RT = Radiotherapy, CC = Capsular
contracture, Inf = Infection, Nec = Necrosis, Re-op = Reoperation.
Figure 2: Meta-analysis of data comparing immediate BR using prosthesis only
treated with RT.
Odds ratio meta-analysis plot of BR with RT v no RT.
35.27 (3.28, infinity)
Corderio 3.17 (1.57, 6.46)
Kruger 4.90 (1.44, 17.89)
Tallet 5.68 (1.40, 32.70)
4.19 (2.43, 7.22)
odds ratio (95% confidence interval)
Table 3: Effect of radiotherapy on implant versus autologous breast
Author TOR Patie
Anderson  Immediate 35 Autolog. Yes 0%
Immediate 50 Implant/Ex Yes 5%
Jhaveri  Immediate 23 Autolog. Yes 8.7%
Immediate 69 Implant Yes 55%
Wong  Immediate 47 Autolog Yes 9%
Immediate 15 Implant based Yes 40%
Stralman  Immediate 59 Autolog Yes 13.5%
Immediate 82 Implant Yes 34%
TOTAL Immediate 164 Autolog Yes 7.8%
TOTAL Immediate 216 Implant Yes 33.5%
TOR = timing of reconstruction, MOR = Method of reconstruction, Ex =
Expander, Autolog. = Autologous reconstruction.
Table 4: Postoperative complications in patients undergoing post-
mastectomy radiotherapy with either immediate implant or immediate
autologous breast reconstruction.
Author N= MOR RT CC.% Inf.% Fib % FN% Reop%
35 Autol Yes 0% 0% 5.7% 17.2% 0%
50 E/I Yes 4% 4% 0% 0% 33%
23 Autol Yes 0% 0% N/A N/A 0%
69 E/I Yes 42.9% 28.6% N/A N/A 20.3%
47 Autol Yes 0% 8.5% N/A N/A 21.3%
15 E/I Yes 40% 13.3% N/A N/A 66.6%
59 Autol Yes 0% N/A N/A N/A 13.5%
82 E/I Yes 17% N/A N/A N/A 34.1%
N = Number of patients, MOR = Method of reconstruction, RT =
Radiotherapy, CC = Capsular contracture, Inf = Infection, Fib = Fibrosis, FN
= Fat necrosis, Reop = Re-operation.
Figure 3: Meta-analysis of data comparing immediate autologous versus
prosthetic BR in the presence of postoperative RT.
Odds ratio meta-analysis plot Immediate Autologous BR +RT v Prosthetic
BR + RT
odds ratio (95% confidence
Table 5: Effects of radiotherapy on immediate and delayed autologous flaps.
Author TOR Patient
MOR Radiotx Comp.
Immediate 19 pTRAM Yes 31%
Delayed 108 pTRAM Yes 25%
Tran  Immediate 32 fTRAM Yes 9.4%
Delayed 70 fTRAM Yes 14.3%
Spear  Immediate 34 pTRAM Yes 50%
Delayed 38 pTRAM Yes 57.1%
TOTAL Immediate 85 TRAM Yes 30.1%
TOTAL Delayed 216 TRAM Yes 32.1%
TOR = timing of reconstruction, MOR = Method of reconstruction, Radiotx =
Radiotherapy, Comp = complications, pTRAM = pedicled TRAM, fTRAM = free
Table 6: Postoperative complications in patients undergoing either
immediate or delayed TRAM breast reconstruction with radiotherapy.
Author TOR Patients RT Fib FN Inf Re-op
Immed 19 Yes 10.5% 15.8% 5.3% N/A
Delay 108 Yes 0% 17.6% 6.6% N/A
Immed 32 Yes 75% 43.8% N/A 9.4%
Delay 70 Yes 0% 8.6% N/A 0%
Immed 34 Yes N/A 23.7% 5.3% 0%
Delay 38 Yes N/A 23.8% 4.8% 2.4%
TOR = Type of reconstruction, RT = Radiotherapy, Fib = Fibrosis, FN = Fat
necrosis, Inf = Infection, Re-op = Re-operation, Immed = Immediate
reconstruction, Delay = Delayed reconstruction, N/A = Not available.
Figure 4. Meta-analysis of immediate versus delayed autologous breast
reconstruction with combined radiotherapy.
Odds ratio meta-analysis plot of Immediate BR + RT v Delayed BR + RT.
0.73 (0.26, 2.04)
0.62 (0.10, 2.67)
1.38 (0.39, 4.38)
0.87 (0.47, 1.62)
odds ratio (95% confidence interval)
1. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized
trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy and lumpectomy plus irradiation
for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Eng J Med. 2002;347:1233-1241.
2. Chevray PM. Timing of breast reconstruction: immediate versus delayed.
Cancer J. 2008 Jul-Aug;14(4):223-9.
3. Meretoja TJ, von Smitten KA, Leidenius MH, Svarvar C, Heikkila PS, Jahkola
TA. Local recurrence of stage 1 and 2 breast cancer after skin sparing
mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction in a 15 year series. Eur J Surg
4. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, et al. Postoperative radiotherapy in
high risk premenopausal women with breast cancer who receive adjuvant
chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 1997;337: 949-955.
5. Ragaz K, Jackson SM, Le N, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in
node positive premenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med.
6. Recht A, Edge SB, Solin LJ, et al. Postmastectomy radiotherapy: clinical
practice guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. J Clin Oncol
2001; 19: 1539-1569.
7. Harris JR, Halpin-Murphy P, McNeese M et al. Consensus Statement on
postmastectomy radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys1999;44:989-990
8. Rutqvist LE, Rose C, Cavallin-Ståhl E. A systematic overview of radiation
therapy effects in breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 2003;42(5-6):532-45.
9. Truong PT, Woodward WA, Bucholz TA, Optimizing locoregional control and
survival for women with breast cancer: a review of current developments in
postmastectomy radiation. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2006; 6: 205-216.
10. Wong JS, Ho AY, Kaelin CM, Bishop KL, Silver B, Gelman R, Harris JR,
Hergrueter CA. Incidence of major corrective surgery after post-mastectomy
breast reconstruction and radiation therapy. Breast J. 2008 Jan-Feb;14(1):49-54.
11. Anderson PR, Hanlon AL, Fowble BL, McNeeley SW, Freedman GM. Low
complication rates are achievable after postmastectomy breast reconstruction
and radiation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004 Jul 15;59(4):1080-7.
12. Thomson HJ, Potter S, Greenwood RJ, Bahl A, Barker J, Cawthorn SJ,
Winters ZE. A prospective longitudinal study of cosmetic outcome in immediate
latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction and the influence of radiotherapy. Ann
Surg Oncol. 2008 Apr;15(4):1081-91. Epub 2008 Jan 26.
13. Miller MJ, Rock CS, Robb GL. Aesthetic breast reconstruction using a
combination of free transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flaps and
breast implants. Ann Plast Surg. 1996 Sep;37(3):258-64.
14. Kroll SS, Marchi M. Immediate reconstruction: Current status in cancer
management. Tex Med 1991;87: 67-72.
15. Spear SL, Ducic I, Low M, Cuoco F. The effect of radiation on pedicled
TRAM flap breast reconstruction: outcomes and implications. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2005 Jan;115(1):84-95.
16. Dean C, Chetty U, Forrest AP. Effects of immediate breast reconstruction on
psychosocial morbidity after mastectomy. Lancet 1983; 1: 459-62.
17. Bloomer WD, Hellman S. Normal issue responses to radiation therapy. N
Engl J Med 1975; 293:80-83.
18. Fajardo LF, Berthrong M. Radiation injury in surgical pathology: part I. Am J
Surg Pathol 1978; 2:159-199.
19. Fajardo LF. Morphologic patterns of radiation injury. Front Radiat Ther Oncol
20. Kronowitz SJ, Robb GL. Breast reconstruction with postmastectomy radiation
therapy: current issues. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004 Sep 15;114(4):950-60.
21. Buchholz TA, Kronowitz SJ, Kuerer HM. Immediate breast reconstruction
after skin-sparing mastectomy for treatment of advanced breast cancer: radiation
oncology considerations. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002; 9: 820-821.
22. Strålman K, Mollerup CL, Kristoffersen US, Elberg JJ. Long-term outcome
after mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. Acta Oncol.
23. Huang CJ, Hou MF, Lin SD et al. Comparison of local recurrence and distant
metastases between breast cancer patients after postmastectomy radiotherapy
with and without immediate TRAM flap reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg.
24. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic
reviews. Ann Intern Med. 127: 820-826, 1997.
25. Tallet AV, Salem N, Moutardier V, et al. Radiotherapy and immediate two
stage breast reconstruction with a tissue expander and implant: complications
and aesthetic results. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2003. 1;57(1) : 136-42.
26. Krueger EA, Wilkins EG, Strawderman M, et al. Complications and patient
satisfaction following expander/implant breast reconstruction with and without
radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2001. 1;49(3) :713-21.
27. 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) :
28. Whitfield GA, Horan G, Irwin MS, et al. Incidence of severe capsular
contracture following implant-based immediate breast reconstruction with or
without postoperative chest wall radiotherapy using 40 Gray in 15 fractions.
Radiother Oncol 2009. 90;141-147.
29. Jhaveri JD, Rush SC, Kostroff K, Derisi D, Farber LA, Maurer VE, Bosworth
JL. Clinical outcomes of postmastectomy radiation therapy after immediate
breast reconstruction. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Nov 1;72(3):859-65.
30. Williams JK, Carlson GW, Bostwick J 3rd, Bried JT, Trimble J, Mackay G.
The effects of radiation treatment after TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast
Reconstr Surg 1997. Oct 100(5); 1153-1160.
31. Tran NV, Chang DW, Gupta A, Kroll SS, Robb GL. Comparison of immediate
and delayed free TRAM flap breast reconstruction in patients receiving
postmastectomy radiation therapy. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2001 Jul;108(1):78-82.
32. Ascherman JA, Hanasono MM, Newman MI, Hughes DB. Implant
reconstruction in breast cancer patients treated with radiation therapy. Plast
Reconstr Surg. 2006 Feb;117(2):359-65.
33. Motwani SB, Strom EA, Schechter NR, Butler CE, Lee GK, Langstein HN,
Kronowitz, SJ, Meric-Bernstam F, Ibrahim NK, Buchholz TA. The impact of
immediate breast reconstruction on the technical delivery of postmastectomy
radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2006 Sep 1;66(1):76-82.
31 Download full-text
34. Kronowitz SJ, Hunt KK, Kuerer HM, Babiera G, McNeese MD, Buchholz TA,
Strom EA, Robb GL. Delayed-immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr
Surg. 2004 May;113(6):1617-28.
35. McKeown DJ, Hogg FJ, Brown IM, Walker MJ, Scott JR, Weiler-Mithoff The
timing of autologous latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction and effect of
radiotherapy on outcome.EM. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008 Feb 7.
36. Kroll SS, Robb GL, Reece GP, Miller MJ, Evans GR, Baldwin BJ, Wang B,
Schusterman MA. Does prior irradiation increase the risk of total or partial free-
flap loss? J Reconstr Microsurg. 1998 May;14(4):263-8.
37. Chang DW, Wang B, Robb GL, et al. Effect of obesity on flap and donor site
complications in free transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap breast
reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2000; 105: 1640-1648.
38. Chang DW, Reece GP, Wang B. Effect of smoking on complications in
patients undergoing free TRAM flap breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg
39. Saulis AS, Mustoe TA, Fine NA. A retrospective analysis of patient
satisfaction with immediate postmastectomy breast reconstruction: comparison of
three common preocedures. Plast Reconstr Surg 2007;119: 1669-78.