Skip to main content
. 2017 Feb;6(1):4–13. doi: 10.21037/gs.2016.08.01

Table 2. Summary of studies on patient satisfaction with local flap nipple reconstruction.

Study Subjects (response rate) Follow-up Surgical technique Responses considered “satisfied” Satisfaction (%) Other results
Nipple appearance Nipple sensation
Chen et al. (11) 11 (100.0) 12–27 months, mean 17 Badge flap + tattooing on free or pedicled TRAM flap reconstruction Score out of 100% 90.5 NA Mean pigmentation score 8.5/10
Cheng et al. (12) 22 (88.0) 6–36 months, mean 18 Modified S dermal-fat flap + tattooing on free or pedicled TRAM, implant-only or LD + implant Moderately pleased, very pleased 86.4 13.6 50% satisfied with nipple projection;
90.9% satisfied with nipple symmetry;
54.5% satisfied with nipple size;
100% satisfied with nipple color;
100% would recommend the procedure
Costa and Ferreira (13) 122 Survey at 3 years C-V flap + tattooing on double-pedicled TRAM or implant Good, excellent 92.6 NA 35% satisfaction in patients who underwent NAC reconstruction with skin graft from medial thigh
Didier et al. (1) 92 (67.8) Survey at 1 year Unspecified Quite a bit, much, very much 43.0 20.0 72% felt sexually attractive compared to 98% pre-operatively; 34% found it difficult to look at themselves naked
El-Ali et al. (14) 50 (100.0) 6–36 months, mean 15.4 Modified C-V flap + tattooing on LD, pedicled TRAM or implant Good, very good 80.0 28.0 (sensation present) 82% satisfied with reconstructed NAC compared to opposite side; 82% reported body image improvement
Goh et al. (15) 91 (100.0) 1–86 months, mean 38.5* Various flaps + tattooing on TRAM, DIEP, LD +/– implant or implant Satisfactory, good, excellent 88.0* NA 95% rated NAC position “about right”*;
87% rated NAC dimension “about right”*;
58% rated NAC projection “about right”*
Gullo et al. (16) 161 Survey at 1 year Star flap enhanced by scar tissue° + tattooing on DIEP, TRAM or implant Good (5–6.9/10), very good (³7/10) 6.61/10 (SS =66.1%) 4.11/10 (SS =41.1%) Color satisfaction score of 6.36; position satisfaction score of 7.24;
symmetry satisfaction score of 7.97
Harcourt et al. (17) 127 (51.4) 3–84 months Unspecified Satisfied, very satisfied 71.6 56.5 81.9% satisfied with nipple color; decision regret most strongly correlated with dissatisfaction and high depression score
Jabor et al. (18) 43 (41.0) ³6 months Various flaps + immediate tattooing on TRAM, LD + implant or implant Good, excellent 64.0 NA No significant difference in NAC satisfaction with different breast mound or NAC types;
factors most disliked in descending order: projection, color, size, texture, position;
mean interval between mound and NAC reconstruction of 9.71 & 7.25 months in satisfied
& unsatisfied patients, respectively (P=0.003)
Losken et al. (19) 11 (“poor”) 3–7 years, mean 5.3 C-V flap + tattooing on TRAM flap Score out of 100% 81.0 26.0 42% satisfied with projection;
62% satisfied with pigmentation
Lossing et al. (20) 21 (100.0) 29–46 months, mean 36 Modified S-flap + tattooing on lateral thoracodorsal flap Score out of 10 8.2/10 (SS =82%) 29.0 (sensation present) Overall breast reconstruction satisfaction score of 8.9
Otterburn et al. (22) 199 >1 year C-V flap + tattooing on TRAM, implant or LD + implant Score out of 5 3.8/5 (SS =76%) 1.3/5 (SS =26%) Color satisfaction score of 3.2/5;
position satisfaction score of 4.2/5;
projection satisfaction score of 3.3/5
Valdatta et al. (23) 29 (100.0) Survey at 1 year C-V flap + tattooing on Score out of 10 6.65/10 (SS =66.5%) 5.57/10 (SS =55.7%) Color satisfaction score of 6.14;
position satisfaction score of 7.85;
projection satisfaction score of 6.28;
symmetry satisfaction score of 7.42

*, data includes results for ten additional patients who underwent composite nipple sharing; ˚, primary procedure in 98 patients, secondary procedure for projection failure in 63 patients. TRAM, transverse rectus abdominus muscle; NA, not applicable; LD, latissimus dorsi muscle; NAC, nipple-areolar complex; DIEP, deep inferior epigastric perforator flap.