Skip to main content

Prospective Comparison of Long-Term Outcomes in Prepectoral vs. Subpectoral Implant Breast Reconstruction After Post-Mastectomy Radiotherapy

Journal
Plastic and reconstructive surgery (Q1)
Published
11 September 2026
Study design
Unclassified
Evidence level
Level 5, Expert Opinion (CEBM 5)
Authors
Eva Roy, Shailesh Agarwal, Rinaa S Punglia, Julia S Wong, Angela C Tramontano, Yoon S Chun
PMID
42725833
DOI
10.1097/PRS.0000000000013455

Why clinicians should know about it

  • Picked for Breast and Endocrine Surgery (paper of the day, 14 September 2026): Prospective comparison of prepectoral vs subpectoral reconstruction

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (PP-IBR) is increasingly favored over subpectoral reconstruction (SP-IBR) to reduce animation deformity, yet data regarding its outcomes after post-mastectomy radiotherapy (PMRT) are limited. This study aims to prospectively compare long-term outcomes of PP-IBR and SP-IBR following PMRT. METHODS: Data were obtained from the multicenter randomized trial, Study of Radiation Fractionation on Patient Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction (FABREC). Complications, aesthetic results, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) were assessed. The FACT-B and Breast-Q Reconstruction Module were administered, and aesthetic outcomes were evaluated by blinded reviewers at 6 and 18 months following PMRT. Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate whether PP-IBR vs. SP-IBR was associated with outcomes after controlling for other covariates. RESULTS: Among 380 patients, 224 underwent PP-IBR and 156 SP-IBR. Demographics were similar, except SP-IBR had a higher proportion of tissue expanders and lower body mass index (BMI). There were no significant differences in PROs, including physical, social, emotional, and functional well-being (FACT-B), or satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and physical well-being (BREAST-Q), at both timepoints. Higher BMI was associated with lower sexual well-being at both 6 and 18 months (Estimate -0.60, p=0.03). At 6 months, SP-IBR was linked to lower aesthetic scores compared to PP-IBR; however, only age remained a significant predictor at 18 months (Estimate -0.02, p=0.00). CONCLUSION: In PMRT settings, both PP-IBR and SP-IBR exhibit comparable complication rates and long-term aesthetic and PRO outcomes. Patient factors, such as age and BMI, appear to play a more prominent role in overall outcomes.

Abstract as published, via PubMed.

View on PubMedFull text at the publisherOpen in the app

For healthcare professionals. The summary is generated by AI from the published abstract, and the evidence level is assigned automatically from the study design on the Oxford CEBM hierarchy. Neither is medical advice. Read the full paper before changing practice.