Secondary reduction mammaplasty techniques and outcomes: Cleveland Clinic experience

BackgroundInformation on optimal techniques and outcomes following secondary reduction mammaplasty remains sparse, with only 280 patient cases reported in the literature to date.

MethodsA total of 7179 medical charts of patients who underwent nononcological breast reduction at the Cleveland Clinic Health System from January 2001 to October 2023 were screened to identify whether the procedure was a secondary reduction. Patient charts were then reviewed to extract demographic, surgical, and outcome data. Patients were also contacted through the electronic medical record to fill out the BREAST-Q V2 questionnaire about postoperative satisfaction. Surgical techniques and satisfaction were compared for patients with complications versus those without.

ResultsOne hundred and twenty-two (1.7%) patients underwent secondary breast reduction. An inferior pedicle was the most used for both primary (n = 59, 48.4%) and secondary (n = 64, 52.5%) surgeries. The primary pedicle was recreated in 62 of the 84 (73.8%) rereductions where a primary pedicle was known. A total of 15 patients (12.3%) completed the BREAST-Q questionnaire. Body mass index was significantly and negatively associated with satisfaction with outcome (R=-0.66, p = 0.01), sexual well-being (R=-0.58, p = 0.04), and physical well-being (R=-0.69, p = 0.006). No patients experienced nipple-areola complex (NAC) necrosis following secondary reduction. However, 21 (17.2%) of patients experienced complications or breast fat necrosis following rereduction. Unmatched secondary pedicles showed a trend toward higher complication rates than matched secondary pedicles (31.3% vs. 12.9%, p = 0.051).

ConclusionWhen known, the primary pedicle can be safely used for secondary reduction mammaplasty with minimal risk of NAC necrosis or complication.