Current Breast Cancer Reports

, Volume 3, Issue 2, pp 79–87 | Cite as

Patient Selection and Technical Considerations in Nipple-Sparing and Areola-Sparing Mastectomy

  • Max DieterichEmail author
  • Bernd Gerber


Skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have gained widespread popularity over the past few years. Breast reconstruction is facilitated and the aesthetic result is improved in comparison to patients undergoing mastectomy alone. The oncologic safety has been demonstrated in various publications. However, discussions still arise regarding correct patient selection and the role of histologic assessment of the subareolar tissue of the nipple areola complex (NAC) to exclude possible tumor infiltration, as this is the main limiting factor of NSM. This review focuses on oncologic consideration, correct patient selection, and surgical management for patients eligible for SSM/NSM. The most recent literature was reviewed to provide evidenced-based recommendations for daily clinical routine.


Breast cancer Nipple-sparing mastectomy Nipple-areola—sparing mastectomy Technique Breast cancer surgery Skin-sparing mastectomy 



Max Dieterich reports no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article. Bernd Gerber reports no potential conflict of interest relevant to this article.


Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    American Cancer Society: What is Breast Cancer. Available at Accessed November 2010
  2. 2.
    van Steenbergen LN, Voogd AC, Roukema JA, et al. Screening caused rising incidence rates of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115(1):181–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Liu SV, Melstrom L, Yao K, Russell CA, Sener SF. Neoadjuvant therapy for breast cancer. J Surg Oncol. 2010;101(4):283–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Gauwerky JF, Dieterich H, Schmidt-Rhode P. Innovative concepts for surgical treatment of the carcinoma of the breast. Zentralbl Gynäkol. 2003;125(9):331–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Toth BA, Lappert P. Modified skin incisions for mastectomy: the need for plastic surgical input in preoperative planning. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1991;87(6):1048–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Carlson GW, Grossl N, Lewis MM, Temple JR, Styblo TM. Preservation of the inframammary fold: what are we leaving behind? Plast Reconstr Surg. 1996;98(3):447–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gui GP, Behranwala KA, Abdullah N, et al. The inframammary fold: contents, clinical significance and implications for immediate breast reconstruction. Br J Plast Surg. 2004;57(2):146–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kroll SS, Ames F, Singletary SE, Schusterman MA. The oncologic risks of skin preservation at mastectomy when combined with immediate reconstruction of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1991;172(1):17–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Munhoz AM, Aldrighi C, Montag E, et al. Periareolar skin-sparing mastectomy and latissimus dorsi flap with biodimensional expander implant reconstruction: surgical planning, outcome, and complications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119(6):1637–49. discussion 50–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Margulies AG, Hochberg J, Kepple J, Henry-Tillman RS, Westbrook K, Klimberg VS. Total skin-sparing mastectomy without preservation of the nipple-areola complex. Am J Surg. 2005;190(6):907–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Petit JY, Veronesi U, Orecchia R, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy in association with intra operative radiotherapy (ELIOT): a new type of mastectomy for breast cancer treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;96(1):47–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Salhab M, Al Sarakbi W, Joseph A, Sheards S, Travers J, Mokbel K. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: patient satisfaction and clinical outcome. Int J Clin Oncol. 2006;11(1):51–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rashid M, Ilahi I, Ur Rehman Sarwar S, et al. Skin sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2005;15(8):467–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kim HJ, Park EH, Lim WS, et al. Nipple areola skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate transverse rectus abdominis musculocutaneous flap reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure: a single center study. Ann Surg. 2010;251(3):493–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Reefy S, Patani N, Anderson A, Burgoyne G, Osman H, Mokbel K. Oncological outcome and patient satisfaction with skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a prospective observational study. BMC Cancer. 2010;10:171.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    •• Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M, Kundt G, Reimer T. The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg 2009;249(3):461–8. With a mean follow-up of 101 months, this study demonstrates the oncologic safety of SSM and NSM mastectomy. On the other hand, it showed a significant shift in the aesthetic evaluation after a follow-up of 5 to 10 years for SSM/NSM, from initially “very good” to “good” and “moderate,” illustrating the complexity of breast reconstruction after SSM/NSM. PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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 Oncol. 2007;33(10):1142–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Howard MA, Polo K, Pusic AL, et al. Breast cancer local recurrence after mastectomy and TRAM flap reconstruction: incidence and treatment options. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;117(5):1381–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Greenway RM, Schlossberg L, Dooley WC. Fifteen-year series of skin-sparing mastectomy for stage 0 to 2 breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2005;190(6):918–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Spiegel AJ, Butler CE. Recurrence following treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ with skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003;111(2):706–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Medina-Franco H, Vasconez LO, Fix RJ, et al. Factors associated with local recurrence after skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2002;235(6):814–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Rivadeneira DE, Simmons RM, Fish SK, et al. Skin-sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a critical analysis of local recurrence. Cancer J. 2000;6(5):331–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yi M, Kronowitz SJ, Meric-Bernstam F, et al. Local, regional, and systemic recurrence rates in patients undergoing skin-sparing mastectomy compared with conventional mastectomy. Cancer 2010;Epub ahead of printGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Brachtel EF, Rusby JE, Michaelson JS, et al. Occult nipple involvement in breast cancer: clinicopathologic findings in 316 consecutive mastectomy specimens. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(30):4948–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gulben K, Yildirim E, Berberoglu U. Prediction of occult nipple-areola complex involvement in breast cancer patients. Neoplasma. 2009;56(1):72–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Banerjee A, Gupta S, Bhattacharya N. Preservation of nipple-areola complex in breast cancer—a clinicopathological assessment. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2008;61(10):1195–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Rusby JE, Brachtel EF, Othus M, Michaelson JS, Koerner FC, Smith BL. Development and validation of a model predictive of occult nipple involvement in women undergoing mastectomy. Br J Surg. 2008;95(11):1356–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Loewen MJ, Jennings JA, Sherman SR, et al. Mammographic distance as a predictor of nipple-areola complex involvement in breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2008;195(3):391–4. discussion 4–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Stolier AJ, Wang J. Terminal duct lobular units are scarce in the nipple: implications for prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy: terminal duct lobular units in the nipple. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(2):438–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Garcia-Etienne CA, Cody Iii HS 3rd, Disa JJ, Cordeiro P, Sacchini V. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: initial experience at the memorial sloan-kettering cancer center and a comprehensive review of literature. Breast J. 2009;15(4):440–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Rusby JE, Smith BL, Gui GP. Nipple-sparing mastectomy. Br J Surg. 2010;97(3):305–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Paepke S, Schmid R, Fleckner S, et al. Subcutaneous mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola skin: broadening the indications. Ann Surg. 2009;250(2):288–92.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Petit JY, Veronesi U, Orecchia R, et al. Nipple sparing mastectomy with nipple areola intraoperative radiotherapy: one thousand and one cases of a 5 years experience at the European institute of oncology of Milan (EIO). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117(2):333–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Petit JY, Veronesi U, Rey P, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: risk of nipple-areolar recurrences in a series of 579 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;114(1):97–101.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Simmons RM, Brennan M, Christos P, King V, Osborne M. Analysis of nipple/areolar involvement with mastectomy: can the areola be preserved? Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(2):165–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Denewer A, Farouk O. Can nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with modified extended latissimus dorsi muscular flap improve the cosmetic and functional outcome among patients with breast carcinoma? World J Surg. 2007;31(6):1169–77.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Caruso F, Ferrara M, Castiglione G, et al. Nipple sparing subcutaneous mastectomy: 66 months follow-up. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32(9):937–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Sacchini V, Pinotti JA, Barros AC, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk reduction: oncologic or technical problem? J Am Coll Surg. 2006;203(5):704–14.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Benediktsson KP, Perbeck L. Survival in breast cancer after nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants: a prospective trial with 13 years median follow-up in 216 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(2):143–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kiluk JV, Santillan AA, Kaur P, et al. Feasibility of sentinel lymph node biopsy through an inframammary incision for a nipple-sparing mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(12):3402–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bayram Y, Kulahci Y, Irgil C, Calikapan M, Noyan N. Skin-reducing subcutaneous mastectomy using a dermal barrier flap and immediate breast reconstruction with an implant: a new surgical design for reconstruction of early-stage breast cancer. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2010;34(1):71–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Radovanovic Z, Radovanovic D, Golubovic A, Ivkovic-Kapicl T, Bokorov B, Mandic A. Early complications after nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction with silicone prosthesis: results of 214 procedures. Scand J Surg 99(3):115–8Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Hultman CS, Daiza S. Skin-sparing mastectomy flap complications after breast reconstruction: review of incidence, management, and outcome. Ann Plast Surg. 2003;50(3):249–55. discussion 55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Davies K, Allan L, Roblin P, Ross D, Farhadi J. Factors affecting post-operative complications following skin sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. BreastGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Garwood ER, Moore D, Ewing C, et al. Total skin-sparing mastectomy: complications and local recurrence rates in 2 cohorts of patients. Ann Surg. 2009;249(1):26–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Gerber B, Krause A, Kuchenmeister I, et al. Skin sparing mastectomy with autologous immediate reconstruction: oncological risks and aesthetic results. Zentralbl Gynäkol. 2000;122(9):476–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Delgado JF, Garcia-Guilarte RF, Palazuelo MR, Mendez JI, Perez CC. Immediate breast reconstruction with direct, anatomic, gel-cohesive, extra-projection prosthesis: 400 cases. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(6):1599–605.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Wijayanayagam A, Kumar AS, Foster RD, Esserman LJ. Optimizing the total skin-sparing mastectomy. Arch Surg. 2008;143(1):38–45. discussion.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Chen CM, Disa JJ, Sacchini V, et al. Nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(6):1772–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ascherman JA, Seruya M, Bartsich SA. Abdominal wall morbidity following unilateral and bilateral breast reconstruction with pedicled TRAM flaps: an outcomes analysis of 117 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;121(1):1–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Selber JC, Fosnot J, Nelson J, et al. A prospective study comparing the functional impact of SIEA, DIEP, and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps on the abdominal wall: part II. Bilateral reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(5):1438–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Selber JC, Nelson J, Fosnot J, et al. A prospective study comparing the functional impact of SIEA, DIEP, and muscle-sparing free TRAM flaps on the abdominal wall: part I. unilateral reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(4):1142–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Heden P, Bronz G, Elberg JJ, et al. Long-term safety and effectiveness of style 410 highly cohesive silicone breast implants. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2009;33(3):430–6. discussion 7–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Spear SL, Murphy DK, Slicton A, Walker PS. Inamed silicone breast implant core study results at 6 years. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;120(7 Suppl 1):8S–16. discussion 7S–8S.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Macadam SA, Ho AL, Cook Jr EF, Lennox PA, Pusic AL. Patient satisfaction and health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction: patient-reported outcomes among saline and silicone implant recipients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(3):761–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Breuing KH, Warren SM. Immediate bilateral breast reconstruction with implants and inferolateral AlloDerm slings. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55(3):232–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Spear SL, Parikh PM, Reisin E, Menon NG. Acellular dermis-assisted breast reconstruction. Aesthet Plast Surg. 2008;32(3):418–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Spear SL, Pelletiere CV. Immediate breast reconstruction in two stages using textured, integrated-valve tissue expanders and breast implants. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2004;113(7):2098–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Djohan R, Gage E, Gatherwright J, et al. Patient satisfaction following nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: an 8-year outcome study. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;125(3):818–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Salgarello M, Visconti G, Barone-Adesi L. Nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant reconstruction: cosmetic outcomes and technical refinements. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2010;126(5):1460–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Yueh JH, Houlihan MJ, Slavin SA, Lee BT, Pories SE, Morris DJ. Nipple-sparing mastectomy: evaluation of patient satisfaction, aesthetic results, and sensation. Ann Plast Surg. 2009;62(5):586–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Giacalone PL, Rathat G, Daures JP, Benos P, Azria D, Rouleau C. New concept for immediate breast reconstruction for invasive cancers: feasibility, oncological safety and esthetic outcome of post-neoadjuvant therapy immediate breast reconstruction versus delayed breast reconstruction: a prospective pilot study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;122(2):439–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    •• Didier F, Radice D, Gandini S, et al. Does nipple preservation in mastectomy improve satisfaction with cosmetic results, psychological adjustment, body image and sexuality? Breast Cancer Res Treat 2009;118(3):623–33. This article shows the importance of body image (NAC preservation) in regard to quality of life in oncologic patients. NAC preservation can have an additional positive impact on the psychological adjustment after the diagnosis breast cancer.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    EBCTCG. Favourable and unfavourable effects on long-term survival of radiotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early breast cancer trialists’ collaborative group. Lancet. 2000;355(9217):1757–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Overgaard M, Nielsen HM, Overgaard J. Is the benefit of postmastectomy irradiation limited to patients with four or more positive nodes, as recommended in international consensus reports? A subgroup analysis of the DBCG 82 b & c randomized trials. Radiother Oncol. 2007;82(3):247–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    EBCTCG. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in early breast cancer. Educat Book ASCO 2007:3–6Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    AJCC. American Joint Committee on Cancer. 2002

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology—Breast UnitUniversity of RostockRostockGermany

Personalised recommendations