Introducing the SKIN Score: A Validated Scoring System to Assess Severity of Mastectomy Skin Flap Necrosis
- 639 Downloads
With increasing use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR), mastectomy skin flap necrosis (MSFN) is a clinical problem that deserves further study. We propose a validated scoring system to discriminate MSFN severity and standardize its assessment.
Women who underwent skin-sparing (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and IBR from November 2009 to October 2010 were studied retrospectively. A workgroup of breast and plastic surgeons scored postoperative photographs using the skin ischemia necrosis (SKIN) score to assess depth and surface area of MSFN. We evaluated correlation of the SKIN score with reoperation for MSFN and its reproducibility in an external sample of surgeons.
We identified 106 subjects (175 operated breasts: 103 SSM, 72 NSM) who had ≥1 postoperative photograph within 60 days. SKIN scores correlated strongly with need for reoperation for MSFN, with an AUC of 0.96 for SSM and 0.89 for NSM. External scores agreed well with the gold standard scores for the breast mound photographs with weighted kappa values of 0.82 (depth), 0.56 (surface area), and 0.79 (composite score). The agreement was similar for the nipple-areolar complex photographs: 0.75 (depth), 0.63 (surface area), and 0.79 (composite score).
A simple scoring system to assess the severity of MSFN is proposed, incorporating both depth and surface area of MSFN. The SKIN score correlates strongly with the need for reoperation to manage MSFN and is reproducible among breast and plastic surgeons.
KeywordsComposite Score Nipple Weighted Kappa Immediate Breast Reconstruction Skin Score
We would like to acknowledge the following physicians who agreed to volunteer as validation raters for this project: Amy Colwell, MD, Laura Dominici, MD, Nora Hansen, MD, Carolyn Kerrigan, MD, Tari King, MD, Henry Kuerer, MD, Jeffrey Landercasper, MD, Colleen McCarthy, MD, Julie Park, MD, and Edwin Wilkins, MD. This work was supported by funds from the Department of Surgery at Mayo Clinic. None of the authors has a financial interest in any of the products, devices, or drugs mentioned in this manuscript.
- 1.American Society of Plastic Surgeons. Plastic Surgery Statistics Report 2013. http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2013-statistics/reconstructive-procedures-national-trends-2013.pdf. 2013.
- 11.Falissard B. psy: Various procedures used in psychometry. R package version 2.15. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=psy 2012.
- 12.Maricevich R, Park J, Brander C. Mastectomy skin necrosis following mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction: a systematic review. Rev Bras Cir Plast. 2011;26(suppl):67.Google Scholar
- 13.Goodwin SJ, McCarthy CM, Pusic AL, et al. Complications in smokers after postmastectomy tissue expander/implant breast reconstruction. Ann Plast Surg. 2005;55:16–9; discussion 19–20.Google Scholar
- 19.Hultman CS, Daiza S. Skin-sparing mastectomy flap complications after breast reconstruction: review of incidence, management, and outcome. Ann Plast Surg. 2003;50:249–55; discussion 255.Google Scholar
- 26.Munabi NC, Olorunnipa OB, Goltsman D, Rohde CH, Ascherman JA. The ability of intra-operative perfusion mapping with laser-assisted indocyanine green angiography to predict mastectomy flap necrosis in breast reconstruction: a prospective trial. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2014;67:449–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 37.Crowe JP, Patrick RJ, Yetman RJ, Djohan R. Nipple-sparing mastectomy update: one hundred forty-nine procedures and clinical outcomes. Arch Surg. 2008;143:1106–10; discussion 1110.Google Scholar