Past
Residual breast tissue (RBT) remaining after mastectomy is a potential concern due to its unclear prevalence and clinical implications. While previous studies have attempted to characterize RBT, they have been limited by small sample sizes, inconsistent sampling methods, and a narrow focus on selected mastectomy types. Furthermore, the factors that may influence the presence of RBT—such as surgical technique, breast size, or surgeon experience—have remained poorly studied.1–4 Our study aimed to comprehensively evaluate the incidence of RBT across all four common types of mastectomy [modified radical mastectomy (MRM), simple mastectomy (SM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM)] using a standardized histopathological sampling protocol.
Present
In our prospective analysis of more than 400 mastectomies, we found that RBT was present in approximately one-third of all procedures, regardless of mastectomy type. Notably, in nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), RBT was almost universally detected beneath the nipple-areolar complex (NAC), consistent with previous findings. Importantly, our results indicate that the prevalence of RBT within the remaining skin flap is comparable across mastectomy types. We also identified key risk factors for RBT, including smaller breast volume and a history of prior breast surgery. Surgeon experience—particularly in NSM—also appeared to influence outcomes, underscoring the importance of surgical expertise in achieving optimal oncological safety.5
Future
While our findings help establish the baseline prevalence and predictors of RBT, the long-term oncological significance of residual tissue remains uncertain. Future research should focus on correlating RBT volume with local recurrence and survival outcomes, particularly in high-risk populations. Standardizing histopathological sampling could also enhance clinical decision-making. Ultimately, integrating RBT evaluation into post-mastectomy surveillance protocols—especially in risk-reducing settings—may guide tailored patient follow-up and improve overall outcomes.
Footnotes
This article refers to: Napierała MJ, Olszewski W, Rosińska M, et al. Residual breast tissue after four kinds of mastectomy—A prospective, comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. (2025). 10.1245/s10434-025-17350-5.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
- 1.Kaidar-Person O, Boersma LJ, Poortmans P, et al. Residual glandular breast tissue after mastectomy: a systematic review. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(7):2288–96. 10.1245/S10434-020-08516-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 2.Ustun I, Beksac K, Kandemir O, Berberoglu U. Location and frequency of residual breast tissue after mastectomy. Breast Care. 2019;14(4):212–5. 10.1159/000494765. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Papassotiropoulos B, Güth U, Chiesa F, et al. Prospective evaluation of residual breast tissue after skin- or nipple-sparing mastectomy: results of the SKINI-Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(5):1254–62. 10.1245/S10434-019-07259-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Griepsma M, De Roy Van Zuidewijn DBW, Grond AJK, Siesling S, Groen H, De Bock GH. Residual breast tissue after mastectomy: How often and where is it located? Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(4):1260–6. 10.1245/s10434-013-3383-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Napierała MJ, Olszewski W, Rosińska M, et al. Residual breast tissue after four kinds of mastectomy—a prospective, comparative study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2025. 10.1245/s10434-025-17350-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]