Evidence Hub

Management of Nipple Necrosis and Wound Complications in Patients Undergoing Unilateral Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Implant-Based Reconstruction for Breast Cancer: A Retrospective, Single-Center Study

Akyuz S, Morkavuk ŞB, Gülçelik MA

Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania), 2026

84 participants

Abstract

Background and Objectives: The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to determine the frequency of early-stage nipple necrosis and wound complications in patients undergoing unilateral skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and direct implant-based reconstruction and describe the conservative/advanced wound care approaches used for these complications. Materials and Methods: A retrospective review was made of the medical records of 84 patients who underwent same-session unilateral SSM and implant-based reconstruction in the Surgical Oncology Clinic between November 2019 and February 2024. Statistical analyses were performed using the Shapiro-Wilk test, Mann-Whitney U-test, and Chi-square/Fisher tests. Results: The mean age of the patients was 43.51 ± 6.5 years, 35.7% of the patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and smoking prevalence was 7.1%. Wound complications developed in 16.7% of the patients, distributed as follows: wound dehiscence 6%, NAC necrosis 8.4%, infection 1.2%, and hematoma 1.2%. Interventions due to complications were performed at rates of 2.4% for areola excision, 2.4% for debridement, and 2.4% for implant excision. The only variable significantly associated with complication development was excision volume, which was higher in the complication group (p = 0.033). Logistic regression analysis showed that a one-unit increase in excision volume was associated with a statistically significant increase in the likelihood of complication development (O.R =…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 84 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free