Objective  To compare the clinical value between breast-conserving plastic surgery and immediate breast reconstruction using prosthesis after nipple-areola sparing mastectomy for breast cancer.

Methods  Thirty-five TNM stage Ⅰ to Ⅱ patients treated with breast conserving plastic surgery and 35 TNM stage Ⅰ to Ⅱ patients treated with immediate breast reconstruction using prosthesis after nipple-areola sparing mastectomy from January 2018 to April 2023 were selected.The general data of patients were collected and analyzed, and the postoperative complications such as intraoperative blood loss, operation time, incision dehiss, infection and ischemic necrosis of the nipple were compared between two groups.The patients were followed up for 6 months after surgery, and the satisfaction of breast aesthetics and quality of life after surgery in two groups were analyzed.

Results  The operation time, drainage tube placement time and hospital stay in the breast-conserving group were shorter than those in reconstruction group(P < 0.01), and the hospitalization cost in the reconstruction group was higher than that in breast-conserving group(P < 0.01).There was no statistical significance in the incidence of postoperative complications between two groups(P>0.05).The satisfaction of postoperative breast aesthetics in two groups were high, and there was no statistical significance in the four dimensions of Breast-Q between two groups(P>0.05).

Conclusions  The aesthetic effect of two groups can meet the needs of patients to preserve the appearance of breast cancer after breast cancer surgery.Breast preservation feels closer to normal breast, and the satisfaction is high.The surgical safety of total breast gland resection combined with prosthesis reconstruction is close to that of modified radical surgery, which is a better choice for patients with psychological burden.For patients who do not meet the conditions of breast preservation, the breast prosthesis reconstruction also has greater advantages.