Patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic breast surgery compared with conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer

Oncoplastic Reconstruction in the Setting of Prior Cosmetic Augmentation

BACKGROUND

This study explored the surgical management and reconstruction options for augmented breasts in the context of breast conservation therapy (BCT) for breast cancer. The authors hypothesized that there would be no difference in the rates of complications, revisions, or patient satisfaction in patients who maintained their breast augmentation versus those who had their implants removed in the context of BCT.

METHODS

The authors conducted a retrospective review of 142 patients who underwent BCT at a single center from March of 2016 to March of 2022. The study included patients who had a preexistent cosmetic augmentation at the time of breast cancer diagnosis and BCT. Patient demographics, clinical and treatment characteristics, breast implant details, reconstructive technique, complications, and revisions were recorded. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using the BREAST-Q BCT module.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients (65.5%) chose to maintain their implants, whereas 49 (34.5%) elected to have them removed during BCT. Patients with submuscular implants were more likely to maintain their implants. Oncoplastic mastopexy was associated with higher complication rates, particularly in patients opting for implant downsizing. However, multivariate logistic regression did not identify implant management strategy as an independent predictor for complications or revisions. Surgical-site infection was the only predictor of implant explantation. Patient-reported outcomes did not differ significantly between the different implant management cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that maintaining breast implants during BCT does not increase the risk of complications or revisions. Overall, BCT in augmented women was found to be a safe approach, with high patient satisfaction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Risk, III.

Efficacy and safety of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery versus conventional breast-conserving surgery: An updated meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. The surgical treatment of breast cancer has transitioned progressively from radical mastectomy to breast-conserving surgery. In this meta-analysis, we are aiming to compare oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OS) with conventional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in terms of efficacy and safety.

METHODS

We searched Medline, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane databases, Clinicaltrial.gov, and CNKI until April 30, 2024. Data from cohort studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Outcomes included primary outcomes (re-excision, local recurrence, positive surgical margin, mastectomy), secondary outcomes and safety outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale were used to evaluate the quality of outcomes.

RESULTS

Our study included 52 studies containing 46,835 patients. Primary outcomes comprise re-excision, local recurrence, positive surgical margin, and mastectomy, there were significant differences favoring OS over BCS (RR 0.68 [0.56, 0.82], RR 0.62 [0.47, 0.82], RR 0.76 [0.59, 0.98], RR 0.66 [0.44, 0.98] respectively), indicating superior efficacy of OS. Additionally, OS demonstrated significant aesthetic benefits (RR 1.17 [1.03, 1.33] and RR 1.34 [1.18, 1.52]). While total complications were significantly fewer in the OS group (RR 0.70 [0.53, 0.94]), the differences in specific complications were not significant. Furthermore, subgroup analyses were conducted based on nationality, sample size, quality, and type.

CONCLUSION

OS demonstrates either superior or at least comparable outcomes across various aspects when compared to BCS.

The value of patient-reported experience in oncoplastic breast conservation following standardized assessment and shared-decision making. A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are emerging as a quality marker for breast cancer care provision. Patient-reported experience (PRE) is equally important, but challenges in qualitative research and documentation have resulted in limited data on oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS). This qualitative study aimed to explore the experiences of patients who underwent OPBCS.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women who underwent OPBCS between 2015 and 2021 at the Breast Unit of Uppsala University Hospital were followed up longitudinally using PROs. All participants were invited to share their experiences beyond PROs through a "diary." Patients' experiences with care, pre- and postoperatively, and other insights and thoughts that they considered important were documented and analyzed. A narrative research methodology, along with thematic analysis, was employed.

RESULTS

Of the 122 women, 60 (49.2 %) desired to further elaborate on their experiences beyond PROs-related aspects. The most common themes included postoperative side effects, challenges responding to questionnaires, adverse effects of adjuvant treatment, external factors contributing to the preoperative and postoperative overall health status, and satisfaction with the surgery and medical staff. Specifically, 26.7 % of the respondents stated that they felt that PROs were not adequately specific and had further reflections.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients did not report different experiences depending on the operative technique. Their experience focused on the perception of wholeness and potential ambiguities in the PRO questionnaires. Documenting PRE is crucial, as it enables individualized assessment following breast cancer treatment, thereby strengthening patient-centered care.

Oncoplastic Surgery Outcomes in the Older Breast Cancer Population: A Matched-Cohort Comparison Study

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is a form of breast conservation surgery (BCS) that involves a partial mastectomy followed by immediate volume displacement or volume replacement surgical techniques. To date, there are few studies evaluating OBS in older patients. Therefore, we sought to determine if outcomes differed between patients 65 years and older versus younger patients who underwent oncoplastic surgical procedures.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed for all oncoplastic breast operations within a single health system from 2015 to 2021. Patients were stratified by age, with patients 65 years and older (OBS65+) identified and then matched with younger patients (OBS <65) based on BMI. Primary outcomes were positive margin rates and overall complication rates; secondary outcomes were locoregional recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and long-term breast asymmetry.

RESULTS

A total of 217 patients underwent OBS over the 6-year period, with 22% being OBS65+. Preoperatively, older patients experienced higher American Anesthesia (ASA) scores, Charlson Co-morbidity index (CCI) scores, and higher rates of diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and grade 3 breast ptosis. Despite this, no significant differences were found between primary or secondary outcomes compared to younger patients undergoing the same procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction is a safe option in patients 65 years and older, with overall similar recurrence rates, positive margin rates, and survival when compared to younger patients. Although the older cohort of patients had greater preoperative risk, there was no difference in overall surgical complication rates or outcomes. Supporting the argument that all oncoplastic breast reconstruction techniques should be offered to eligible patients, irrespective of age.

A Clinical Analysis of Prognosis and Patient-Reported Outcomes of Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery for Early Breast Cancer: A Retrospective Cohort Study

PURPOSE

Approximately 25-30% of patients suffer from breast deformity and/or asymmetry after conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS). Generally, it is thought that oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCS) results in an improved cosmetic result; however, studies comparing the prognosis and aesthetic outcomes of CBCS and OBCS in early breast cancer (EBC) are inadequate.

METHODS

A total of 143 patients were included in this retrospective cohort study; 53 underwent OBCS and 90 underwent CBCS. The resected weight, complications, esthetic results, patient satisfaction, and recurrence rate were compared between the groups. Patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were assessed by the BREAST-Q questionnaire.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients in OBCS group was 43.8 years. This was younger than that in CBCS group (49.1 years, p < 0.001). Postoperative complications (11.3% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.64) and re-excision (5.7% vs. 6.7%, p > 0.99) rates were similar. The OBCS group had higher breast satisfaction and psychosocial well-being than the CBCS group (75 vs. 63, p < 0.001 and 84 vs. 77, p = 0.05); however, sexual well-being (56 vs. 66, p = 0.05) and physical well-being (65 vs. 76, p < 0.001) were worse in OBCS. After 42.3 (range: 12.6-69.2)-month median follow-up, no difference in event-free survival (EFS) was demonstrated between the groups (p = 0.13).

CONCLUSION

Although OBCS has the better aesthetic outcomes and identical oncological safety in comparison with CBCS, the sexual and physical well-being in OBCS are not improved for Asian patients. Hence, choosing an appropriate procedure may be more important for the typically small to moderate-sized breasts characteristic of Asian females unlike Westerners.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Local practice variations and payer differences underlie state-wide disparities in oncoplastic breast surgery

BACKGROUND

Little is known about disparities in oncoplastic breast surgery delivery.

METHODS

The Massachusetts All-Payer Claims Database was queried for patients who received lumpectomy for a diagnosis of breast cancer. Oncoplastic surgery was defined as adjacent tissue transfer, complex trunk repair, reduction mammoplasty, mastopexy, flap-based reconstruction, prosthesis insertion, or unspecified breast reconstruction after lumpectomy.

RESULTS

We identified 18 748 patients who underwent lumpectomy between 2016 and 2020. Among those, 3140 patients underwent immediate oncoplastic surgery and 436 patients underwent delayed oncoplastic surgery. Eighty-one percent of patients who underwent oncoplastic surgery did so in the same county as they underwent a lumpectomy. However, the relative frequency of oncoplastic surgery varied significantly among counties. In multivariable regression, public insurance status (odds ratio: 0.87, 95% confidence interval: 0.80-0.95, p = 0.002) was associated with lower odds of undergoing oncoplastic surgery, even after adjusting for macromastia, other comorbidities, and county of lumpectomy. Average payments for lumpectomy with oncoplastic surgery were more than twice as high from private insurers ($840 vs. $1942, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Disparities in the receipt of oncoplastic surgery were related to differences in local practice patterns and the type of insurance patients held. Expanding services across counties and considering billing reform may help reduce these disparities.

Comparison of Oncological and Aesthetic Outcomes between Tissue Rearrangement Technique and Pedicled Latissimus Dorsi Flap Reconstruction in Cases of Upper Outer Quadrant Breast Cancer

Background

Emerging as an adjunct to breast-conserving surgery, oncoplastic breast surgery seeks to improve the cosmetic and functional outcomes for breast cancer surgery. The objective was to assess the potential advantages of using the latissimus dorsi (LD) flap, in comparison with local tissue rearrangement, in terms of aesthetic results and postoperative problems.

Methods

This study compared the outcomes of patients with a malignant tumor removed from the upper outer quadrant of the breast using a comparative nonrandomized control approach. Participants were split into two groups: reconstruction using local tissue rearrangement was performed on 20 patients (group A), and a pedicled LD flap was used to treat the same number of patients (group B). All patients were examined in the clinics' outpatient setting. Every 3 months, the medical oncology team would do a thorough clinical assessment.

Results

Better aesthetic outcomes were significantly higher among patients with an LD flap. The LD flap was able to maintain breast shape in 90%, breast volume in 85%, and the nipple-areola complex direction in 90% of patients. Surgeons' evaluation of both techniques reported significantly higher satisfaction for LD flap than local tissue replacement. Patient satisfaction was significantly higher among patients with an LD flap. With regard to the postoperative complications, there were no significant differences between either group.

Conclusions

Oncoplastic breast surgery with reconstruction using the pedicled LD flap provides maintenance of the shape of female breasts with better aesthetic outcomes and patient and surgeon satisfaction than reconstruction using local tissue rearrangement, with a comparable complication rate.

Patient Satisfaction, Esthetic Outcome, and Quality of Life in Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery: A Single Center Experience

Background

Oncoplastic surgery has become an important part of the surgical repertoire to offer both oncologically safe and aesthetically pleasing results in patients with breast cancer. Data comparing oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeries are limited. This study aimed to assess patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in our cohort of oncoplastic and reconstructively operated patients.

Methods

Patients who underwent oncoplastic surgery, including immediate reconstruction by a single surgeon, between 2010 and 2018 were contacted to participate in this study. In total, 157 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 54 patient data sets were used for statistical evaluation. Body Image Scale (BIS) and BreastQ questionnaires were used to measure subjective PRO scores, and pictures were taken to objectively measure symmetry using the Breast Analyzing Tool (BAT). Patients were divided into three groups according to the Tübingen classification (group 1: Tübingen 3-4 (n = 16), group 2: Tübingen 5 (n = 26), group 3: Breast Reconstruction/Tübingen 6 (n = 12]).

Results

The mean age was 53.5 for group 1, 51.4 for group 2 and 46.8 for group 3. The mean follow-up was 62.9 ± 35.82 months. BIS was significantly better in group 3 (3.92 ± 1.73) than in group 1 and 2 (7.69 ± 4.48 and 4.81 ± 3.41, p = 0.016). Symmetry measured using BAT showed only a trend favoring reconstruction (p = 0.12). The BreastQ item "Sexual well-being" was significantly better in oncoplastic breast reduction surgery (p = 0.036).

Conclusion

BIS was better after reconstructive breast surgery than after oncoplastic surgery. Reconstructive breast surgery in experienced breast care units offers high patient satisfaction and a high quality of life.

Oncoplastic surgery in the USA: a review of where we started, where we are today and where we are headed

The surgical management of breast cancer has evolved tremendously over the last century and now includes oncoplastic techniques that improve both cosmetic and oncologic outcomes for patients. The purpose of this review is to provide the reader with a broad overview of the history of oncoplastic breast surgery in the United States (USA), and to summarize important patient factors and technical innovations for optimal operative planning in the era of multimodal treatment of breast cancer. The indications for oncoplastic surgery (OPS) have broadened significantly as more women pursue breast conservation with preservation of their native breast tissue. The operative philosophy of OPS is based on fundamental reconstructive principles, with technique selection based largely on tumor size and location. Reduction mammoplasty and mastopexy techniques have become some of the most utilized procedures in OPS due to their versatility to address tumors in almost all areas of the breast. Volume replacement techniques with locoregional perforator flaps continue to gain popularity as a single-stage reconstructive option for women with large tumor to breast ratios, especially with specialized plastic surgeons at high volume, academic centers. The oncologic advantages of OPS have allowed women to avoid mastectomy with improved margin control, re-excision rates, and equivalent overall survival all while preserving the aesthetic outcomes for these patients. Despite the proven benefits of OPS, numerous healthcare systems barriers including insurance status, geographic location, referral patterns, and racial disparities all continue to play a role in access to surgical sub-specialized breast oncology care demonstrating the need for ongoing research and education about oncoplastic principles.

Shoulder function following oncoplastic breast conserving surgery-a narrative review

Background and Objective

The high prevalence of breast cancer survivors makes it very relevant to investigate late morbidity following the treatment. Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OPS) has gained great popularity over the past years, and evidence-based knowledge suggest better prognosis for treatment with breast conserving surgery (BCS) compared to mastectomy. The aim was to investigate if OPS causes late effects on an acceptable level compared to what we know about breast surgery causing late effects.

Methods

Using the Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) terms "Breast Neoplasms", "shoulder", "oncoplast*", and "reconstruct*", the databases PubMed, Embase, and Scopus were searched on the 6th of June 2023. The literature search was managed in Covidence. We focused on studies describing late effects especially shoulder function including restrictions in mobility, reduced strength, as well as functional impairment.

Key Content and Findings

Nine studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Different kinds of oncoplastic procedures were described-most of them described volume replacement procedures. The knowledge of shoulder morbidity following OPS is limited. The heterogeneity in the selected studies was broad. Some of the studies were small and there was a considerable variation in follow-up time. They described shoulder function based on several different evaluation methods [range of motion (ROM), Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand (DASH), Quick-DASH (Q-DASH), Shoulder Pain and Disability Index (SPADI), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and non-validated subjective questionnaires]. All studies found acceptable levels of shoulder morbidity.

Conclusions

The requisite knowledge of late effects following OPS is still not available for unambiguous recommendations. This narrative review has elucidated the knowledge and has reached a conclusion based on review of the existing literature of this item. We found that the risk of decreased shoulder function caused by OPS-volume displacement as well as volume replacement-does not exceed the risk of shoulder problems seen after BCS and mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction. Therefore, OPS can be considered if conventional BCS is not possible. But the knowledge of shoulder function after OPS is limited, and studies comparing shoulder function after OPS, BCS and mastectomy with or without immediate reconstruction are warranted.

Disparities in quality of life among patients with breast cancer based on surgical methods: a cross-sectional prospective study

To determine the impact of breast conservation on quality of life and identify treatment-related and other demographic factors associated with post-breast cancer treatment quality of life. A prospective study was conducted on 392 women who underwent breast cancer surgery at Hangzhou Cancer Hospital from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2022. Operable breast cancer patients who had completed all treatments except endocrine therapy were included. Patients with tumor recurrence/metastasis, bilateral or male breast cancer, and other primary malignancies were excluded. After enrollment, patients were asked to complete the BREAST-Q scale, and their pathological and medical records were reviewed. Analysis of variance was used to compare the quality of life scores among the groups. Univariate and multivariate linear regression analyses were performed to identify independent factors associated with quality of life scores in different domains. Participants completed the BREAST-Q scale at a median of 4.6 years after surgery. Quality of life scores varied based on the therapeutic strategy. Breast conservation has significant advantages over mastectomy in terms of breast satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being. Compared to oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery, mastectomy was independently associated with decreased breast satisfaction, psychosocial, and sexual well-being, while conventional breast-conserving surgery showed comparable outcomes to oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in terms of these factors. Breast conservation leads to an improvement in quality of life compared to mastectomy. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery does not lead to a decrease in quality of life compared to conventional breast-conserving surgery and offers better outcomes compared to mastectomy.

Health-related quality of life by type of breast surgery in women with primary breast cancer: prospective longitudinal cohort study

BACKGROUND

Health-related quality of life and patient-related outcome measures for patients with cancer have gained increased interest over the last decade. However, few prospective studies with longitudinal data evaluated health-related quality of life in patients with breast cancer. This study aimed to investigate how health-related quality of life changed from the time of diagnosis to 1 year after breast cancer surgery for the main surgical techniques.

METHODS

This prospective longitudinal single-centre study included patients with primary breast cancer diagnosed in 2019-2020 who underwent surgery. Patients completed a health-related quality of life questionnaire (Breast-Q) at baseline. One year after surgery, they completed the Breast-Q a second time, the EORTC (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer) quality of life questionnaire-C30 and the quality of life questionnaire-BR23. Analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used to evaluate the differences in health-related quality of life between surgical groups. Analysis of covariance with robust standard errors was used to adjust for confounders.

RESULTS

In total, 340 patients were included in the study; 160 patients received oncoplastic partial mastectomy, 112 received partial mastectomy, 42 received mastectomy and 26 had mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Patients that had partial mastectomy or oncoplastic partial mastectomy were more satisfied with their breasts (P < 0.001), had a better body image (P = 0.006) and higher sexual functioning scores (P = 0.027) than patients who had a mastectomy with/without reconstruction. The oncoplastic and mastectomy with reconstruction groups had more breast symptoms than other groups (P < 0.001), and the mastectomy group had the least symptoms from the chest area.

CONCLUSION

Partial mastectomy and oncoplastic partial mastectomy have the best outcomes in terms of breast satisfaction, body image and sexual functioning. This highlights the importance of preserving the breast when feasible and underscores that breast reconstruction is not equal to breast conservation. Registration number: NCT04227613 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

[Updated surgical indications and quality and safety indicators in the management of infiltrative breast carcinoma]

OBJECTIVES

Breast surgery is the cornerstone of breast cancer treatment. Its indications and procedures are constantly evolving. To update best practices, four questions were submitted to the Senology Commission (SC) of the Collège national des gynécologues et obstétriciens français (CNGOF), covering the indications and modalities of tumor surgery: (1) initially, (2) following neoadjuvant systemic treatment, (3) in case of local recurrence, and (4) the quality and safety of care indicators applicable to this surgery.

METHODS

The CNGOF SC essentially based its responses on the clinical practice recommendations and guidelines of the French Cancer Institute concerning invasive carcinomas of the breast. Exclusion criteria were carcinoma in situ, sarcoma and axillary surgery.

RESULTS

To define the type of breast surgery, knowledge of four parameters is essential: the patient's level of risk, the presence of metastases, the size of the breast tumor and its focality (assessed by the clinical/mammography/ultrasound tripod). (1) In the case of initial management, the 6 indications for mastectomy are patient choice (particularly in case of high risk), contraindication to radiotherapy, inflammatory cancer (T4d), surgery with positive margins (after several surgical intervention), surgery that cannot be performed as a monobloc in the case of tumors with multiple foci, and poor expected aesthetic results. All other situations should be treated conservatively. (2) The same criteria apply after neoadjuvant systemic treatment, with conservative treatment still possible whatever the size (excluding carcinomatous mastitis) and focality of the initial tumor. (3) In case of local recurrence, total mastectomy is the reference treatment, with a second conservative treatment reserved for patients with no risk factors for a second recurrence, and no poor prognostic factors, after validation in a multidisciplinary meeting. (4) Four quality and safety indicators apply to breast surgery: it must be performed after obtaining a histological diagnosis, within less than 6 weeks of mammography, in a single surgery in over 80% of cases, and followed by local radiotherapy in the case of conservative treatment.

CONCLUSION

The indications and modalities of breast surgery are evolving rapidly. To improve aesthetic results, oncoplastic techniques, immediate breast reconstruction, and preservation of the skin or nipple-areolar complex need to be further developed and evaluated in the long-term. These developments must necessarily be accompanied in France by a training policy for breast surgeons.

Clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes after oncoplastic breast surgery in breast cancer patients: A matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

Surgery is the recommended treatment for breast cancer, the most common cancer in women in Taiwan and the leading cause of cancer-related deaths. Although breast-conserving surgery (BCS) has good prognosis, in some cases, BCS may cause more significant deformities and interfere with the patient's psychosocial well-being. Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is the treatment option in these cases. This study aimed to determine the outcomes of OBS and BCS regardless of clinical and patient-reported esthetic outcomes.

METHODS

Between 2015 and 2020, 50 patients who underwent OBS at our hospital after complete treatment were enrolled. With 1:2 matched ratios, 100 patients were enrolled in the BCS control group. Clinical outcomes were analyzed. The BREAST-Q questionnaire was then assessed 6 months after the completion of treatment for subjective patient-reported outcomes.

RESULTS

Due to the matching process, no difference was noted between the two groups in terms of demographic data such as age, comorbidities, or tumor characteristics. There were no significant differences in the local recurrence rate, disease-free survival, overall survival, positive margin rate, rewide excision rate, conversion to mastectomy rate, or complication rate (major or minor) between both groups. However, the OBS group showed higher satisfaction with breasts in the BREAST-Q questionnaire ( p < 0.001). The mean follow-up time was 38.77 ± 14.70 months in the BCS group and 29.59 ± 14.06 months in the OBS group.

CONCLUSION

OBS seems to be a safe and feasible surgery in breast cancer patients because clinical outcomes are compatible with BCS. Moreover, the OBS group had better patient-reported outcomes in terms of satisfaction.

Narrative review of patient-reported outcomes of breast reconstruction

Background and Objective

The treatment of breast cancer encompasses both the elimination of malignancy as well as reconstruction after tumor extirpation. Although the patient may have had successful treatment of her breast cancer, the resulting disfigurement and deformity can have a substantial impact on her physical and mental well-being. Breast reconstruction affords these patients the opportunity to correct these deformities and potentially to improve their quality of life. The current literature review evaluates patient-reported outcomes for the various options of breast reconstruction that are most commonly performed.

Methods

A literature review on PubMed with the key words "patient-reported outcomes", "breast reconstruction", and "breast cancer" yielded 738 results, which were screened. Articles that specifically focused on patient-reported outcomes after various types of breast reconstruction were evaluated and included in this literature review.

Key Content and Findings

The main options of alloplastic reconstruction, autologous tissue reconstruction, and oncoplastic reconstruction were reviewed and found to demonstrate high levels of patient satisfaction. Although there is no clear superior option, patient-reported outcomes demonstrate improved well-being compared to no reconstruction.

Conclusions

Breast reconstruction provides the opportunity to correct the deformities after breast cancer treatment making it a crucial component of comprehensive cancer care. A variety of reconstructive options are available which can be tailored to each individual patient to achieve the optimal results for that particular patient. Therefore patient-reported outcomes are paramount to gauge the true success of not only breast cancer treatment but also reconstructive aspects after treatment.

Comparison of the Quality of Recovery-15 score in patients undergoing oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery under monitored anesthesia care versus general anesthesia: a prospective quality improvement study

PURPOSE

Whether changing the institutional practice from general anesthesia (GA) to monitored anesthesia care (MAC) affects postoperative quality of recovery for oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is currently unknown. We designed this quasi-experimental study to evaluate a quality improvement (QI) initiative instituted in Edmonton, AB, Canada.

METHODS

We chose a prospective controlled cohort study design for this QI study, where patients underwent oncoplastic BCS under MAC in one hospital and BCS under GA at another hospital (control). A total of 125 patients undergoing surgery between May 2021 and February 2022 were enrolled. Exclusion criteria were male sex, total mastectomy, or age under 18. All other patients were included. The primary outcome was the change in Quality of Recovery-15 score at 24 hr compared with a preoperative baseline. Secondary outcomes included intra- and postoperative time profiles, perioperative analgesic and antiemetic use and length of hospital stay. Statistical analysis included a propensity score analysis to account for confounding variables.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients received GA and 61 MAC. No enrolled patients were lost to follow up but two were excluded secondarily. No patients receiving MAC needed conversion to GA or unplanned airway management. Monitored anesthesia care was associated with superior outcomes for the primary outcome (β/SE[β], 3.31; 99.5% confidence interval, 0.45 to 6.17; P = 0.001) and most secondary outcomes, when accounting for confounding factors.

CONCLUSIONS

A care transformation initiative for patients undergoing oncoplastic BCS under MAC was associated with a higher quality recovery profile and shorter length of stay without any increase in perioperative or postoperative adverse events.

Expanded indications for breast-conserving surgery with oncoplastic approaches compared to conventional approaches: a single-center retrospective comparative cohort study

Background

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBS) is the evolution of conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS); however, data from studies comparing patients who received two surgical procedures are limited. A comparison of differences in terms of the patient characteristics, tumor-nipple distance, volume of resected breast tissue, tumor volume and postoperative breast appearance between patients undergoing OPBS and CBCS was carried out in this study, enhancing the evidence base for OPBS by widening indications and improving patient satisfaction.

Methods

From January 2020 to April 2022, the Breast Center of West China Hospital conducted a retrospective comparative study involving 106 patients. Preoperative characteristics of patients were recorded, and the tumor-nipple distance, the volume of resected breast tissue, tumor volume and patient-reported esthetic outcomes measured by the Harris cosmetic scale were compared between patients who underwent OPBS and CBCS.

Results

Each group had a median follow-up time of 2 months, ranging from 1 week to 6 months. The tumor-nipple distance was significantly shorter in patients receiving OPBS than in those receiving CBCS (2.98±1.42 vs. 3.85±1.78 cm, P=0.006). The rate of positive margin evaluated by intraoperative frozen section biopsy was significantly lower in OPBS group than in CBCS group (2/43, 4.65% vs. 11/63, 17.46%; P=0.048). The maximum diameter of resected tissue (7.80±2.29 vs. 6.75±1.87 cm, P=0.011) and volume of resected tissue (74.20±42.77 vs. 45.52±30.99 cm3, P<0.001) were significantly larger with OPBS. The tumor size, tumor volume (either clinically measured by ultrasound or pathologically measured), tumor location, and reoperation rate due to positive margins did not differ significantly between groups. Moreover, insignificant differences existed regarding patient satisfaction between two groups (87.30% vs. 81.40%).

Conclusions

The OPBS strategy allowed extensive resections and expanded indications with equivalent cosmetic satisfaction and favorable oncological safety.

Long-Term Patient-Reported Outcomes Comparing Oncoplastic Breast Surgery and Conventional Breast-Conserving Surgery: A Propensity Score-Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) combines plastic surgery techniques with conventional breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and expands BCS eligibility. Limited data are available on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) after OBS. Here we compare long-term PROs after OBS and BCS utilizing the BREAST-Q.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women undergoing OBS or BCS between 2006 and 2019 who completed ≥ 1 long-term BREAST-Q survey 3-5 years postoperatively were identified. Baseline characteristics were compared between women who underwent OBS/BCS. Women who underwent OBS were paired with those who underwent BCS using 1:2 propensity matching [by age, body mass index (BMI), race, T stage, and multifocality]. BREAST-Q scores were compared preoperatively and 3-5 years postoperatively.

RESULTS

A total of 297 patients were included for analysis (99 OBS/198 BCS). Women who underwent OBS were younger (p < 0.001) and had higher BMI (p = 0.005) and multifocal disease incidence (p = 0.004). There was no difference between groups in nodal stage, re-excision rates, axillary surgery, chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, or radiotherapy. After propensity matching preoperatively, women who underwent OBS reported lower psychosocial well-being (63 versus 100, p = 0.039) but similar breast satisfaction and sexual well-being compared with women who underwent BCS; however, only three patients who underwent BCS had preoperative BREAST-Q scores available for review. In long-term follow-up, women who underwent OBS reported lower psychosocial scores (74 versus 93, p = 0.011) 4 years postoperatively, but not at 5 years (76 versus 77, p = 0.83). There was no difference in long-term breast satisfaction or sexual well-being.

CONCLUSIONS

Women who undergo OBS present with a larger disease burden and may represent a group of non-traditional BCS candidates; they reported similar long-term breast satisfaction and sexual well-being compared with women who undergo BCS. While women who underwent OBS reported lower psychosocial well-being scores preoperatively and during a portion of the follow-up period, this difference was no longer seen at 5 years postoperatively.

Practical oncoplastic surgery techniques needed for practice

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OPS) is a form of breast conservation surgery that includes immediate breast reconstruction. OPS has previously been shown to be a safe and effective treatment for breast cancer. In a special series on Breast Reconstruction, we aimed to describe oncoplastic breast reconstruction options and the corresponding technical details. Sections were divided by descriptions of OPS specific preoperative workup, volume displacement techniques, volume replacement techniques, and postoperative considerations. In addition, to sharing expert surgical pearls gained through performing OPS procedures over the years. Innovations in breast reconstruction offer women treatment options that are both oncologically safe and aesthetically preferred. The rise in reconstructive procedures is changing how patients make decisions based on their diagnosis. The ultimate surgical decision should be determined by the patient's anatomy, patient's personal preferences, tumor characteristics, and clinical presentation in a shared decision-making fashion with a multidisciplinary team. However, with both volume displacement and volume replacement techniques, women of all breast sizes can achieve an aesthetic outcome without sacrificing oncologic resection.

Simultaneous Symmetry Procedure in Patients Undergoing Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery: An Evaluation of Patient Desire and Revision Rates

INTRODUCTION

In the era of oncoplastic breast conserving-surgery (OBCS), cosmetic outcomes and the desire for symmetry have become essential elements of the surgical management of breast cancer (BC). The timing of contralateral symmetry procedures remains a controversial topic. Simultaneous symmetry procedures (SSP) in OBCS have not been routinely offered due to the perceived risk of delayed asymmetry, potentially increasing the need for delayed cosmetic revision. This study evaluates the rate of revision after SSP in patients undergoing OBCS.

METHODS

We reviewed our institutional prospectively maintained database identifying all BC patients treated surgically since our introduction of oncoplastic surgery in 2018. We routinely offer SSP when appropriate. Descriptive statistics evaluated oncoplastic surgical techniques, SSP offerings and procedures, perioperative complications, and revision rates after treatment completion.

RESULTS

Between 2018 and 2022, 485 breast cancer patients underwent partial mastectomy, and 396 (82%) underwent OBCS. Of the 313 patients offered SSP, 272 (87%) accepted. The margin reexcision rate of this cohort was 20%. Of the 272 patients with SSP, 152 (56%) underwent intraoperative radiation therapy (IORT), and 105 (39%) had adjuvant external beam radiation therapy. Three patients (1%) experienced complications involving the symmetry side. No patients with complications experienced a delay in adjuvant therapies or requested cosmetic revisions. Three patients (1%) desired surgical revisions due to asymmetry.

CONCLUSIONS

Symmetry procedures at the time of OBCS are widely accepted by patients and rarely require delayed cosmetic revision. Simultaneous symmetry procedures should be routinely discussed with patients during the surgical planning of OBCS.

Implementation of a Breast Intraoperative Oncoplastic Form to Aid Management of Oncoplastic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery (BCS) uses concurrent reduction and/or mastopexy with lumpectomy to improve aesthetic outcomes. However, tissue rearrangement can shift the original tumor location site in relation to external breast landmarks, resulting in difficulties during re-excision for a positive margin and accurate radiation targeting. We developed the Breast Intraoperative Oncoplastic (BIO) form to help depict the location of the tumor and breast reduction specimen. This study seeks to assess physician perspectives of the implementation outcomes.

METHODS

From February 2021 to April 2021, the BIO form was used in 11 oncoplastic BCS cases at a single institution. With institutional review board approval, surgical oncologists (SOs), plastic surgeons (PSs), and radiation oncologists (ROs) were administered a 12-question validated survey on Acceptability of Intervention Measure (AIM), Intervention Appropriateness Measure (IAM), and Feasibility of Intervention Measure (FIM), using a 5-point Likert scale during initial implementation and at 6-month reassessment.

RESULTS

Twelve physicians completed the survey initially (4 SOs, 4 PSs, and 4 ROs). The mean scores for Acceptability of Intervention Measure, Intervention Appropriateness Measure, and Feasibility of Intervention Measure were high (4.44, 4.56, and 4.56, respectively). Twelve completed the second survey (5 SOs, 3 PSs, and 4 ROs). The mean scores were marginally lower (4.06, 4.21, and 4.25). There were no significant differences when stratified by number of years in practice or specialty. Free text comments showed that 75% of physicians found the form helpful in oncoplastic BCS.

CONCLUSIONS

The data indicate high feasibility, acceptability, and appropriateness of the BIO form. Results of this study suggest multidisciplinary benefits of implementing the BIO form in oncoplastic BCS.

Quality of life and satisfaction of patients after oncoplastic or traditional breast-conserving surgery using the BREAST-Q (BCT module): a prospective study

INTRODUCTION

The oncoplastic conservative surgery was developed as a natural evolution of traditional surgery, attempting to improve the therapeutic and aesthetic outcomes where tumor resection could be followed by not-adequate results. Our primary aim is to evaluate how patient satisfaction and quality-of-life after conservative oncoplastic surgery, using BREAST-Q (BCT Module), change pre- and post-operatively. The secondary aim is to compare patient-reported outcome after oncoplastic or traditional conservative surgery.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We enrolled 647 patients who underwent traditional conservative surgery or oncoplastic surgery from January 2020 to December 2022. Only 232 women (35.9%) completed the BREAST-Q questionnaire on a web-based platform, at the preoperative phase and 3 months after treatment.

RESULTS

The average score of "Psychosocial well-being" and "Satisfaction with Breasts" 3 months after surgery showed a statistically significant improvement, while the average score for "Physical well-being: Chest" at 3 months showed a worsening compared to the baseline. "Sexual well-being" did not show statistically significant change. A significant difference between the post-operative outcome of oncoplastic surgery and traditional surgery was observed only for Physical well-being (better for traditional surgery).

CONCLUSIONS

The study showed significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes 3 months after the surgery, except for physical discomfort that increases especially after oncoplastic surgery. Furthermore, our data, as well as many others, point to the appropriateness of using OCS where there is an effective indication, while the perspective of patients cannot find significant superiority over TCS in any of the areas analyzed.

A Scoping Review of the Application of BREAST-Q in Surgical Research

Background

Collection of patient-reported outcome (PRO) data can facilitate cost-effective, evidence-based, and patient-centered care. The BREAST-Q has become the gold standard tool to measure PRO data in breast surgery. The last review of its application indicated that it was underutilized. Considering the evolution in breast surgery, the purpose of this study was to perform a scoping review of BREAST-Q application since 2015 and identify emerging trends and potential persistent gaps to guide patient-centered practice and future research in breast surgery.

Methods

We performed an electronic literature review to identify publications published in English that used the BREAST-Q to assess patient outcomes. We excluded validation studies, review papers, conference abstracts, discussions, comments, and/or responses to previously published papers.

Results

We identified 270 studies that met our inclusion criteria. Specific data was extracted to examine the evolution of the BREAST-Q application and examine clinical trends and research gaps.

Discussion

Despite a significant increase in BREAST-Q studies, gaps in the understanding of the patient experience remain. The BREAST-Q is uniquely designed to measure quality of life and satisfaction with outcome and care. The prospective collection of center-specific data for every type of breast surgery will generate important information for the provision of patient-centered and evidence-based care.

Response rates in clinical quality registries and databases that collect patient reported outcome measures: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) are being increasingly introduced in clinical registries, providing a personal perspective on the expectations and impact of treatment. The aim of this study was to describe response rates (RR) to PROMs in clinical registries and databases and to examine the trends over time, and how they change with the registry type, region and disease or condition captured.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping literature review of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases, in addition to Google Scholar and grey literature. All English studies on clinical registries capturing PROMs at one or more time points were included. Follow up time points were defined as follows: baseline (if available), < 1 year, 1 to < 2 years, 2 to < 5 years, 5 to < 10 years and 10 + years. Registries were grouped according to regions of the world and health conditions. Subgroup analyses were conducted to identify trends in RRs over time. These included calculating average RRs, standard deviation and change in RRs according to total follow up time.

RESULTS

The search strategy yielded 1,767 publications. Combined with 20 reports and four websites, a total of 141 sources were used in the data extraction and analysis process. Following the data extraction, 121 registries capturing PROMs were identified. The overall average RR at baseline started at 71% and decreased to 56% at 10 + year at follow up. The highest average baseline RR of 99% was observed in Asian registries and in registries capturing data on chronic conditions (85%). Overall, the average RR declined as follow up time increased.

CONCLUSION

A large variation and downward trend in PROMs RRs was observed in most of the registries identified in our review. Formal recommendations are required for consistent collection, follow up and reporting of PROMs data in a registry setting to improve patient care and clinical practice. Further research studies are needed to determine acceptable RRs for PROMs captured in clinical registries.

Closed Incision Negative Pressure Therapy in Oncoplastic Surgery Prevents Delays to Adjuvant Therapy

Breast reductions, including oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS), have high postoperative wound healing complication (WHC) rates, ranging from 17% to 63%, thus posing a potential delay in the onset of adjuvant therapy. Incision management with closed incision negative pressure therapy (ciNPT) effectively reduces postoperative complications in other indications. This retrospective analysis compares postoperative outcomes and delays in adjuvant therapy in patients who received ciNPT on the cancer breast versus standard of care (SOC) after oncoplastic breast reduction and mastopexy post lumpectomy.

Methods

Patient demographics, ciNPT use, postoperative complication rates, and time to adjuvant therapy were analyzed from the records of 150 patients (ciNPT = 29, SOC = 121). Propensity score matching was used to match patients based on age, body mass index, diabetes, tobacco use, and prior breast surgery.

Results

In the matched cohort, the overall complication rate of ciNPT-treated cancerous breasts was 10.3% (3/29) compared with 31% (9/29) in SOC-treated cancerous breasts (P = 0.096). Compared with the SOC-treated cancerous breasts, the ciNPT breasts had lower skin necrosis rates [1/29 (3.4%) versus 6/29 (20.7%); P = 0.091] and dehiscence rates [0/29 (0%) versus 8/29 (27.6%); P = 0.004]. In the unmatched cohort, the total number of ciNPT patients who had a delay in adjuvant therapy was lower compared to the SOC group (0% versus 22.5%, respectively; P = 0.007).

Conclusion

Use of ciNPT following oncoplastic breast reduction effectively lowered postoperative wound healing complication rates and, most importantly, decreased delays to adjuvant therapy.

Aesthetic outcomes of breast-conserving surgery and oncoplastic surgery with the new scale named Quality of Life Questionnaire Breast Reconstruction Module-23

Purpose

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) has been developed with the aim of improving breast-conserving surgery (BCS) to provide better aesthetic and functional outcomes for breast cancer patients. We aimed to compare overall quality of life (QoL) and satisfaction with breast reconstruction in patients undergoing BCS and OPS using the Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and recently validated QLQ-Breast Reconstruction module (QLQ-BRECON23).

Methods

A total of 87 patients were included in this single-center study between January 1, 2018 and December 31, 2021; 43 underwent OPS (49.4%) and 44 underwent BCS (50.6%). The data on patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were obtained from the prospectively collected database at the hospital. QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BRECON23 were used to evaluate psychosocial well-being, fatigue symptoms, overall QoL, sexual well-being, sensation of the operative area, and satisfaction with the reconstruction.

Results

According to QLQ-C30 evaluation there were significantly better outcomes for patients treated with OPS than BCS in terms of psychosocial well-being, fatigue symptoms, and overall QoL (P = 0.005, P = 0.016, and P = 0.004; respectively), according to QLQ-BRECON23 evaluation there were also significantly better outcomes in terms of sexual well-being, sensation of the operative area, and satisfaction of the reconstruction (P < 0.001, P = 0.002, and P < 0.001; respectively).

Conclusion

We found that the overall QoL and satisfaction with breast reconstruction in patients undergoing OPS are better than those undergoing BCS. Our study is critical because it is the first study comparing OPS and BCS using the QLQ-BRECON23, which was recently validated.

Modern Approaches to Oncoplastic Surgical Treatment

Partial breast reconstruction using oncoplastic techniques is performed at the time of lumpectomy and includes volume replacement techniques such as flaps and volume displacement techniques such as reduction and mastopexy. These techniques are used to preserve breast shape, contour, size, symmetry, inframammary fold position, and position of the nipple-areolar complex. Newer techniques such as auto-augmentation flaps and perforator flaps continue to broaden options and newer radiation therapy protocols will hopefully reduce side effects. Options for the oncoplastic approach now include higher risk patients as there is a larger repository of data on the safety and efficacy of this technique.

Sometimes it is better to just make it simple. De-escalation of oncoplastic and reconstructive procedures

Simple breast conservation surgery (sBCS) has technically advanced onto oncoplastic breast procedures (OBP) to avoid mastectomy and improve breast cancer patients' psychosocial well-being and cosmetic outcome. Although OBP are time-consuming and expensive, we are witnessing an increase in their use, even for cases that could be managed with sBCS. The choice between keeping it simple or opting for more complex oncoplastic procedures is difficult. This review proposes a pragmatic approach in assisting this decision. Medical literature suggests that OBP and sBCS might be similar regarding local recurrence and overall survival, and patients seem to have higher satisfaction levels with the aesthetic outcome of OBP when compared to sBCS. However, the lack of comprehensive high-quality research assessing their safety, efficacy, and patient-reported outcomes hinders these supposed conclusions. Postoperative complications after OBP may delay the initiation of adjuvant RT. In addition, precise displacement of the breast volume is not effectively recorded despite surgical clips placement, making accurate dose delivery tricky for radiation oncologists, and WBRT preferable to APBI in complex OBP cases. With a critical eye on financial toxicity, patient satisfaction, and oncological outcomes, OBP must be carefully integrated into clinical practice. The thoughtful provision of informed consent is essential for decision-making between sBCS and OBP. As we look into the future, machine learning and artificial intelligence can potentially help patients and doctors avoid postoperative regrets by setting realistic aesthetic expectations.

Oncoplastic versus conventional breast-conserving surgery in breast cancer: a pooled analysis of 6941 female patients

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in women. In the past few years, surgical interventions for breast cancer have experienced massive changes from radical excision to conserving approaches. In this study, we aim to compare the two breast surgery interventions, including conventional breast-conserving surgery (CBCS) versus oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS).

METHODS

We searched on PubMed, Web of Science (WOS), Scopus, Embase, and Cochrane till 2 October 2021. All relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were included. The data were extracted and pooled using Review Manager software (RevMan 5.4).

RESULTS

The pooled meta-analysis of the included studies showed that OPBCS was significantly superior to CBCS in most of the outcomes. Re-excision significantly favoured CBCS (RR = 0.49, 95% CI [0.37, 0.63], P < 0.00001). However, local recurrence (RR = 0.55, 95% CI [0.27, 1.09], P = 0.09), close surgical margins (RR = 0.37, 95% CI [0.14, 1.00], P = 0.05) and end up to the risk of mastectomy (RR = 0.73, 95% CI [0.54, 97], P = 0.06) showed no significant difference between both techniques. Notably, while performing a sensitivity analysis, other outcomes as local recurrence, significantly showed favourable results towards OPBCS. In terms of safety outcomes, there was no significant difference between OPBCS and CBCS.

CONCLUSION

We recommend the oncoplastic approach rather than the conventional one in females with breast cancer. Re-excision rates showed better results following OPBCS.

Access to Results of Patient Reported Outcome Surveys Does Not Improve Survey Response Rates

INTRODUCTION

In this embedded substudy of a longitudinal, randomized controlled trial, we sought to evaluate the effects of patient engagement and results feedback on longitudinal patient-reported outcome (PRO) survey completion rates.

METHODS

Newly diagnosed stage 0-III breast cancer patients seen at an academic breast center between June 2019 and December 2021 were invited to participate in a longitudinal PRO study. Participants were emailed the BREAST-Q survey, a validated PRO scale, preoperatively and at regular intervals during their postoperative course. Patients were randomized into the intervention group, who received survey results upon completion, or the control group, who received no feedback. The primary endpoint was postoperative survey completion rate. An intention to treat analysis was performed and a quasi-Poisson regression was used to compare rates of longitudinal survey completion between the two groups.

RESULTS

Of the 253 patients offered the preoperative survey, 115 were in the intervention group and 138 were in the control group. Postoperative survey completion rate was 54% for the intervention group and 47% for the control group. There was no significant difference in longitudinal postoperative survey completion rate between the two groups (rate ratio 1.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.31).

CONCLUSIONS

In this prospective randomized controlled study, patients did not complete surveys at a higher rate when their survey results were shared with them, suggesting that viewing these results without appropriate clinical context does not generate significant enhancement in patient engagement. Effective interventions to improve survey response rate must be identified to better evaluate PROs.

Comprehending the impact of #Breastcancer, #Breastsurgery and related hashtags on Twitter: A content and social network cross-sectional analysis #Breastcancer#Breastsurgery

BACKGROUND

Early detection along with improved locoregional and systemic therapies have decreased breast cancer mortality and allowed for the clinical implementation of breast conserving surgical options, in turn reducing the clinical and psychosocial impact of mastectomy. To what extend this has been successfully conveyed through social media for breast cancer awareness, has not been previously investigated.

METHODS

This study presents a content and social network cross-sectional descriptive study of Twitter and Google trends data worldwide from platform launch (2006 and 2004 respectively) until May 15th, 2022, in agreement with the STROBE guidelines. Tweets associated with the hashtags #Breastcancer, #Breastsurgery, #Oncoplasticsurgery, #Mastectomy, #Breastreconstruction, #Breastconservingsurgery were licensed and downloaded through the Vincitas and Tweetbinder online platforms. Associated available demographics, namely username, biography, location, date and language of post, were extracted from the Twitter dataset while interest percentage, location and language of search were extracted from the Google trends dataset.

RESULTS

A total of 390111 unique tweets were generated by 127284 unique users, with 2 users engaging with all six hashtags. Original tweets constituted on average 39.1% [Min 30.7% to max 47.2%] of the total. Hashtag frequency increased on Twitter for all six searches during October, the breast-cancer awareness month, but not on Google trends. Cancer survivors engaged much more often with the hashtag #Breastcancer and #Mastectomy, whereas #Breastsurgery, #Oncoplasticsurgery, #Breastconservingsurgery, #Breastreconstruction were mostly used by health professionals.

CONCLUSION

In this large qualitative and quantitative dataset, geo-temporal oscillations on Twitter and Google trends for hashtags relevant with breast cancer provide preliminary insights on information flow and user engagement. Understanding the effective use of social media platforms may provide the niche for disseminating evidence and promoting education on the surgical options of patients with breast cancer.

Therapeutic mammoplasty: a "wise" oncoplastic choice-lessons from the largest single-center cohort from Asia

Introduction

The majority of breast cancer patients from India usually present with advanced disease, limiting the scope of breast conservation surgery. Therapeutic mammoplasty (TM), an oncoplastic technique that permits larger excisions, is quite promising in such a scenario and well suited to breast cancer in medium-to-large-sized breasts with ptosis and in some cases of large or multifocal/multicentric tumors. Here, we describe our TM cohort of 205 (194 malignant and 11 benign) patients from 2012 to 2019 treated at a single surgeon center in India, the largest Asian dataset for TM.

Methods

All patients underwent treatment after careful discussions by a multidisciplinary tumor board and patient counseling. We report the clinicopathological profiles and surgical, oncological, cosmetic, and patient-related outcomes with different TM procedures.

Results

The median age of breast cancer patients was 49 years; that of benign disease patients was 41 years. The breast cancer cohort underwent simple (n = 84), complex (n = 71), or extreme (n = 44) TM surgeries. All resection margins were analyzed through intra-operative frozen-section assessment with stringent rad-path analysis protocols. The margin positivity rate was found to be 1.4%. A majority of the cohort was observed to have pT1-pT2 tumors, and the median resection volume was 180 cc. Low post-operative complication rates and good-to-excellent cosmetic scores were observed. The median follow-up was 39 months. We observed 2.07% local and 5.7% distal recurrences, and disease-specific mortality was 3.1%. At median follow-up, the overall survival was observed to be 95.9%, and disease-free survival was found to be 92.2%. The patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) showed good-to-excellent scores for all types of TMs across BREAST-Q domains.

Conclusion

We conclude that in India, a country where women present with large and locally advanced tumors, TM safely expands the indications for breast conservation surgery. Our results show oncological and cosmetic outcomes at acceptable levels. Most importantly, PROM scores suggest improved overall wellbeing and better satisfaction with the quality of life. For patients with macromastia, this technique not only focuses on cancer but also improves self-image and reduces associated physical discomfort often overlooked by women in the Indian setting. The popularization of this procedure will enable Indian patients with breast cancer to receive the benefits of breast conservation.

Effect of standardised surgical assessment and shared decision-making on morbidity and patient satisfaction after breast conserving therapy: A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

The role of oncoplastic breast conserving therapy (OPBCT) on physical function, morbidity and patient satisfaction has yet to be defined. Additionally, technique selection should be individualised and incorporate patient preference. The study aim was to investigate differences between "standard" (sBCT) and oncoplastic breast conservation (OPBCT) in patient-reported outcomes (PROs) when patients have been assessed in a standardised manner and technique selection has been reached through shared decision-making (SDM).

METHODS

This is a cross-sectional study of 215 women treated at a tertiary referral centre. Standardised surgical assessment included breast and lesion volumetry, definition of resection ratio, patient-related risk factors and patient preference. Postoperative morbidity and patient satisfaction were assessed by validated PROs tools (Diseases of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand-DASH and Breast-Q). Patient experience was assessed by semi-structured interviews.

RESULTS

There was no difference of the median values between OPBCT and sBCT in postoperative morbidity of the upper extremity (DASH 3.3 vs 5, p = 0.656) or the function of the chest wall (Breast-Q 82 vs 82, p = 0.758). Postoperative satisfaction with breasts did not differ either (Breast-Q 65 vs 61, p = 0.702). On the individual level, women that opted for OPBCT after SDM had improved satisfaction when compared to baseline (+3 vs -1, p = 0.001). Shared decision-making changed patient attitude in 69.8% of patients, leading most often to de-escalation from mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings support that a combination of standardised surgical assessment and SDM allows for tailored treatment and de-escalation of oncoplastic surgery without negatively affecting patient satisfaction and morbidity.

Subaxillary Replacement Flap Compared with the Round Block Displacement Technique in Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery: Functional Outcomes of a Feasible One Stage Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

For selected women diagnosed with breast cancer (BC), partial reconstructive techniques involve displacement or replacement procedures to improve cosmesis without compromising oncological safety. This study aims to evaluate the surgical outcomes of the round block (RB) compared with the subaxillary flap (SF) technique for patients with upper outer tumor.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Thirty-three patients treated with oncoplastic conserving surgery (15 RB and 18 SF) were enrolled in this retrospective study. After carrying out a comparison of baseline characteristics, all cases were recruited for postoperative evaluation of oncological and cosmetic parameters. Moreover, we investigated several scoring combinations to check whether they could discriminate surgeon and patient satisfaction according to different functional results.

RESULTS

Median age (p < 0.05), average tumor size (p > 0.05), estimated resection volume (p > 0.05), and nodal involvement (p > 0.05) were slightly higher in the SF group. A greater frequency of DCIS (p < 0.05) in the RB series correlated with reintervention for positive margins (p > 0.001). At a mean follow-up of 19 months, no locoregional recurrences were recorded and early and late complications were comparable (p > 0.05). The overall satisfaction with cosmesis was characterized by similar proportions of good results (p > 0.05), with some details more related to each procedure.

CONCLUSION

The proposed techniques represent effective solutions for reshaping that follows upper outer wide excision, achieving comparable complication rates, low reinterventions, and good aesthetic results in relation to technical and social functioning evaluations. However, it is crucial to establish a careful patient selection in order to manage correct surgical planning while predicting any potential sequelae or complication.

Determination of Oncologic Outcomes, Satisfaction, and Psychosocial Well-being in Patients with Breast Cancer after Oncoplastic and Conventional Breast Conserving Surgery

Background

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women and surgery is necessary for its treatment. We aimed to determine the oncologic outcomes, satisfaction with breasts, and psychosocial well-being in the patients with breast cancer, after oncoplastic and conventional breast conserving surgery (BCS).

Method

The patients with breast cancer from Shahid Motahari Clinic affiliated to Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran from December 2020 to December 2021 were allocated to two groups, one who had undergone BCS alone and the patients who had undergone oncoplastic BCS. For all the patients, demographic data, data about surgery, oncologic outcomes, wound complications, and BREAST-Q© questionnaire score were collected and compared between two groups.

Result

The mean age of the patients in the oncoplastic BCS and BCS group was 48.13±9.73 (median=48), and 50.01±8.47 (median=50) years, respectively. The mean score of psychosocial well-being was higher in the oncoplastic BCS group in comparison with BCS alone. (P-value< 0.0001). Also, the mean score of satisfaction with breast was higher among the oncoplastic BCS group in comparison with the BCS group (P-value< 0.0001).

Conclusion

Replacing traditional BCS with oncoplastic BCS does not adversely affect the oncologic results of surgery but improves the consequent psychosocial well-being and satisfaction in the patients.

[The Significance of Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction After Tumorectomy in Surgical Breast Cancer Therapy]

Breast-conserving therapy (BCT), meaning tumorectomy in combination with systemic therapy and locoregional radiation therapy has become the preferred method to treat early-stage breast cancer. With excellent long-term recurrence-free and overall survival rates, breast surgeons today must deliver du- rable and aesthetically appealing results that guarantee a good quality of life to meet the high patient expectations. Oncoplas- tic breast surgery (OPBS) is an innovative approach to improve the overall results of BCT. Often carried out by a team of a plastic surgeon and an oncologic breast surgeon, OPBS can actively prevent breast deformities without compromising oncological safety. In the following, an overview of the principles and techniques of oncoplastic breast surgery will be given due to its ever-increasing significance and its advantages and dis- advantages will be discussed in the context of reconstructive breast surgery.

Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Breast Cancer Surgery: Evidence Review and Tool Adaptation

The objective of this scoping review was to review survey instruments for Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) and provide recommendations to construct a tool for PROMs specifically for breast cancer patients who have undergone surgery, to overcome the limitations of existing validated tools. A total of 924 articles were screened. Nine articles were selected based on the eligibility criteria. We found that PROMs' data collection along with advancements in the treatment of breast cancer and the resultant improved clinical outcomes, there is a growing appreciation and focus on improving patients' quality of life (QoL). Previous studies have shown that the assessment of PROMs is linked to a positive effect on patients' symptoms of distress, quality of life, acceptance, and satisfaction. Several PROMs tools have been validated for use in cancer survivors. However, it is unclear whether existing tools are appropriate for use in breast cancer patients who have undergone surgical treatment. Hence, we conducted a scoping review. Following a review of the current PROM related to breast cancer and the necessity to build specialized PROMs related to the outcomes of breast cancer surgery, we provide recommendations for the development of a comprehensive tool to overcome the limitations of existing PROMs tools.

Innovation in Breast Surgery: Practical and Ethical Considerations

The adoption of innovation is essential to the evolution of patient care. Breast surgical oncology advances through incorporating new techniques, devices, and procedures. Historical changes in practice standards from radical to modified radical mastectomy or axillary node dissection to sentinel node biopsy reduced morbidity without sacrifice in oncologic outcome. Contemporary oncoplastic techniques afford broader consideration for breast conservation and the potential for improved cosmetic outcomes. At present, many breast surgeons face the decision of which wireless device to use for localization of nonpalpable lesions. Consideration for future changes, such as robotic mastectomy, are on the horizon. No guideline exists to assist breast surgeons in the adoption of innovation into practice. The Ethics Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons acknowledges that breast surgeons confront many questions associated with onboarding innovation. This paper aims to provide a framework for asking relevant questions along with the ethical principles to consider when integrating an innovation into practice.

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction: Principles, current techniques, and future directions

Oncoplastic breast reconstruction has improved esthetic results after breast-conserving surgery with low complication rates and stable oncologic outcomes. Basic principles can be applied across different volume displacement and replacement techniques including restoration of breast shape and symmetry through esthetic incisions while eliminating dead space. Technique selection is guided by several factors including breast size, resection-to-breast ratio, and patient desires. A surgeon familiar with all techniques will allow individualization of treatment and optimization of outcomes.

Diagnostik und Therapie aus der Patientenperspektive - PROMs in der Chirurgie

Die zunehmend an Bedeutung gewinnenden Patient reported Outcome and Experience Measures (PROMs/PREMs) können in allen chirurgischen Disziplinen zusätzlich zu den klassischen harten Endpunkten wie z. B. Überlebenskurven und Implantatestandzeiten wichtige Informationen zu Qualitätsindikatoren oder Entscheidungshilfen zu konkurrierenden Therapieverfahren liefern. Dies gilt ebenso für die Evaluation neuer Therapiekonzepte wie für Vergleiche klassisch offener Zugangswege und minimalinvasiver bzw. endoskopischer Verfahren z. B. im Hinblick auf geringere Zugangsmorbidität und schnellere Rehabilitation vs. höherem Komplikationsrisiko, aber auch der Risiko-Nutzen-Bewertung der Verlängerung der Lebenszeit einerseits auf Kosten einer Beeinträchtigung der Lebensqualität andererseits.

Diesem Zusatznutzen steht ein notwendiger Ressourceneinsatz (Personal- und Sachkosten für Postversand oder für eine Onlineerhebung in Form von Entwicklungs-, Bereitstellungs- oder Lizenz- und Servicekosten) gegenüber, der sich nur bedingt beeinflussen lässt (z. B. Portokosten für eine Vollerhebung vs. repräsentative Stichprobe). Die zentrale Voraussetzung für den erfolgreichen Einsatz von PROMs und PREMs ist jedoch, dass geeignete, sprachlich und inhaltlich validierte Erhebungsinstrumente verfügbar sind oder durch einen Validierungsprozess zur Verfügung gestellt werden können.

Für den Einsatz von PROMs bei konkurrierenden Therapieansätzen findet sich bereits eine Reihe von Beispielen, die wertvolle Unterstützung bieten und sich im Klinikalltag etabliert haben. So können sie bei belastenden Therapieansätze in der chirurgischen Tumortherapie bei Entscheidungen über ein verbessertes Überleben bei starker Belastung vs. dem Erhalt oder sogar Zugewinn an Lebensqualität unterstützen. In der onkologischen Mammachirurgie steht die Lebensqualität bei brusterhaltendem Vorgehen häufig der Überlebenszeit bezogen auf das TU-Stadium bei Ablation gegenüber. Ebenso gilt es bei Prostatakarzinompatienten, immer wieder zwischen invasiver Therapie und Verlaufsbeobachtung (Überleben vs. Inkontinenz und Potenzstörungen) zu entscheiden. In der Orthopädie/Unfallchirurgie gibt es bei einer Reihe von Eingriffen häufig eine Alternative, z. B. Sprunggelenkendoprothesen vs. Arthrodesen oder inverse Schulterprothesen vs. Osteosynthese bei schultergelenknahen Humerusfrakturen.

Aber auch bei der Evaluation neuer Therapiekonzepte (z. B. der subjektive Aspekt einer früheren Wiedererlangung der Selbstständigkeit durch Einführung neuer Nachbehandlungskonzepte/sog. Fast-Track-Reha) sind PROMs und PREMS wichtige Werkzeuge.

Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery-A Multidisciplinary Approach

Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care.

Oncoplastic Surgery and the Clinical Features of Breast Cancer—Relevant Factors Associated with Reoperation in Breast Oncoplastic Surgery

Oncoplastic breast surgery slowly becomes a part of routine breast cancer surgical management but evidence with regard to oncological safety remains limited. The aim of this study was to compare relevant factors associated with the particular type of breast carcinoma and the applied surgical techniques either with or without oncoplastic surgery. This retrospective study enrolled the breast cancer female patients who underwent breast-conserving therapy alone or with the oncoplastic surgery in the Department of Surgical Oncology at the Center of Oncology of the Lublin Region St. Jana from Dukli in the years 2008–2011. The study involves 679 breast cancer patients who underwent oncoplasty (n = 81) and the control group (n = 598). There is a significant relationship between the histological type of breast cancer (p = 0.00000) along with the expression of estrogen and/or progesterone receptors (p = 0.01285) and the usage of oncoplastic surgery in breast cancer patients. Interestingly, in the majority of cases, there was no need to conduct a reoperation. Oncoplastic surgery is an effective and safe strategy that might be favorable especially for those patients who are potential candidates for more invasive surgical methods. High-quality evidence to support the oncological safety and benefits of oncoplastic breast surgery is lacking.

Innovative Standards in Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery: From Radical Mastectomy to Extreme Oncoplasty

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS), which is the current procedure of choice for eligible BC patients, describes a philosophy that prioritizes oncologic and cosmetic outcomes. However, knowledge gaps regarding training, acceptance, and practice preclude standardization and make it difficult to design algorithmic guidelines to optimize individualized management in the era of precision medicine.

SUMMARY

The harmony between patient expectations and oncologic goals creates the state of the art of OBCS. Nevertheless, to achieve these goals, multidisciplinary approach is a must. Surgical decisions require a comprehensive evaluation including patient factors, tumor biology, genetics, technical considerations, and adjunct therapies. Moreover, the quality-of-life (QOL) issues should be considered as the highest level of priority with a shared decision making instituted on realistic discussions with the patient.

KEY MESSAGES

The standardization in OBCS should be initiated via defining a breast surgeon who should gain theorical and practical competence on techniques via national or international educational programs. The algorithmic patient assessment with appropriate documentation before and after surgery should be established. A simple and safe global lexicon should be designed regarding techniques to be proposed and quality metrics to be considered. Additionally, international multicenter prospective trials should be instituted to overcome knowledge gaps. It is evident that OBCS is the perfect union of science with art. Nevertheless, at the very end, the question is not the nature of the surgeon/artist who would be the extremist, the innovator, or the conservative, but the patient's satisfaction, prognosis, and QOL that conclude the cascade of state of the art of OBCS.

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for women with primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) involves removing the tumour in the breast and using plastic surgery techniques to reconstruct the breast. The adequacy of published evidence on the safety and efficacy of O-BCS for the treatment of breast cancer compared to other surgical options for breast cancer is still debatable. It is estimated that the local recurrence rate is similar to standard breast-conserving surgery (S-BCS) and also mastectomy, but the aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes may be improved with oncoplastic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess oncological control outcomes following O-BCS compared with other surgical options for women with breast cancer. Our secondary objective was to assess surgical complications, recall rates, need for further surgery to achieve adequate oncological resection, patient satisfaction through patient-reported outcomes, and cosmetic outcomes through objective measures or clinician-reported outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase (via OVID), the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 August 2020. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies (cohort and case-control studies). Studies evaluated any O-BCS technique, including volume displacement techniques and partial breast volume replacement techniques compared to any other surgical treatment (partial resection or mastectomy) for the treatment of breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors performed data extraction and resolved disagreements. We used ROBINS-I to assess the risk of bias by outcome. We performed descriptive data analysis and meta-analysis and evaluated the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. The outcomes included local recurrence, breast cancer-specific disease-free survival, re-excision rates, complications, recall rates, and patient-reported outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 78 non-randomised cohort studies evaluating 178,813 women. Overall, we assessed the risk of bias per outcome as being at serious risk of bias due to confounding; where studies adjusted for confounding, we deemed these at moderate risk. Comparison 1: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus standard-BCS (S-BCS) The evidence in the review found that O-BCS when compared to S-BCS, may make little or no difference to local recurrence; either when measured as local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.34; 4 studies, 7600 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or local recurrence rate (HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.83; 4 studies, 2433 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain due to most studies not controlling for confounding clinicopathological factors. O-BCS compared to S-BCS may make little to no difference to disease-free survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26; 7 studies, 5532 participants; low-certainty evidence). O-BCS may reduce the rate of re-excisions needed for oncological resection (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; 38 studies, 13,341 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may increase the number of women who have at least one complication (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27; 20 studies, 118,005 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and increase the recall to biopsy rate (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.42; 6 studies, 715 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis was not possible when assessing patient-reported outcomes or cosmetic evaluation; in general, O-BCS reported a similar or more favourable result, however, the evidence is very uncertain due to risk of bias in the measurement methods. Comparison 2: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy alone O-BCS may increase local recurrence-free survival compared to mastectomy but the evidence is very uncertain (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91; 2 studies, 4713 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of O-BCS on disease-free survival as there were only data from one study. O-BCS may reduce complications compared to mastectomy, but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias mainly resulting from confounding (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83; 4 studies, 4839 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data on patient-reported outcome measures came from single studies; it was not possible to meta-analyse the data. Comparison 3: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy with reconstruction O-BCS may make little or no difference to local recurrence-free survival (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.62; 1 study, 3785 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or disease-free survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.22; 1 study, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to mastectomy with reconstruction, but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may reduce the complication rate compared to mastectomy with reconstruction (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.54; 5 studies, 4973 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias from confounding and inconsistency of results. The evidence is very uncertain for patient-reported outcome measures and cosmetic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain regarding oncological outcomes following O-BCS compared to S-BCS, though O-BCS has not been shown to be inferior. O-BCS may result in less need for a second re-excision surgery but may result in more complications and a greater recall rate than S-BCS. It seems that O-BCS may give better patient satisfaction and surgeon rating for the look of the breast, but the evidence for this is of poor quality, and due to lack of numerical data, it was not possible to pool the results of different studies. It seems O-BCS results in fewer complications compared with surgeries involving mastectomy. Based on this review, no certain conclusions can be made to help inform policymakers. The surgical decision for what operation to proceed with should be made jointly between clinician and patient after an appropriate discussion about the risks and benefits of O-BCS personalised to the patient, taking into account clinicopathological factors. This review highlighted the deficiency of well-conducted studies to evaluate efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes following O-BCS.

Oncoplastic breast surgery versus conventional breast conserving surgery - a prospective follow-up study of subjective loco-regional late morbidity

Background and aim: Few studies have focused on the symptoms of loco-regional morbidity in shoulders, arms, and breasts related to oncoplastic breast surgery (OPS). This study aimed to determine if a difference exists in the prevalence or variety of subjective symptoms of shoulder, arm, and breast morbidity in patients undergoing OPS compared with patients receiving conventional breast conserving surgery (C-BCS). Cosmetic result and body image were included as secondary endpoints.Methods: This prospective follow-up study with 18 months of questionnaire-based follow-up included women with breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. They were divided into two groups - C-BCS or OPS - depending on type of surgery performed. Furthermore, patient, disease, and treatment characteristics were recorded.Results: Among 334 completers, 229 (69%) received C-BCS and 105 (31%) received OPS. Participants were comparable regarding age, comorbidity, BMI, re-excision rate (15-16%), and axillary surgery. As for tumor characteristics, a more advanced disease stage was shown in the OPS than in the C-BCS group with larger tumor and lumpectomy size, more multifocality, and the corresponding following systemic adjuvant therapy.The questionnaire revealed that the two groups were comparable with no significant differences in frequency or variety of symptoms of shoulder and arm morbidity. Overall, participants were highly satisfied with the cosmetic results in both groups and no significant inter-group differences were observed.Conclusion: In patients with larger tumors, breast conserving surgery utilizing oncoplastic techniques yields results regarding subjective shoulder, arm, and breast morbidity as well as cosmetic outcome comparable with those of C-BCS performed on smaller tumors.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, registration number: NCT02159274 (2014).HIGHLIGHTSSubjective symptoms of shoulder, arm, and breast morbidity are comparable when oncoplastic breast surgery is compared to conventional breast conserving surgery.The variety of symptoms of shoulder and arm morbidity following oncoplastic surgery does not differ from symptoms following conventional breast conserving surgery.The cosmetic outcome following oncoplastic breast surgery is comparable to breast conserving surgery without oncoplastic techniques.

Should oncoplastic breast conserving surgery be used for the treatment of early stage breast cancer? Using the GRADE approach for development of clinical recommendations

Introduction

The potential advantages of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (BCS) have not been validated in robust studies that constitute high levels of evidence, despite oncoplastic techniques being widely adopted around the globe. There is hence the need to define the precise role of oncoplastic BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer, with consensual recommendations for clinical practice.

Methods

A panel of world-renowned breast specialists was convened to evaluate evidence, express personal viewpoints and establish recommendations for the use of oncoplastic BCS as primary treatment of unifocal early stage breast cancers using the GRADE approach.

Results

According to the results of the systematic review of literature, the panelists were asked to comment on the recommendation for use of oncoplastic BCS for treatment of operable breast cancer that is suitable for breast conserving surgery, with the GRADE approach. Based on the voting outcome, the following recommendation emerged as a consensus statement: Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery should be recommended versus standard breast conserving surgery for the treatment of operable breast cancer in adult women who are suitable candidates for breast conserving surgery (with very low certainty of evidence).

Discussion

This review has revealed a low level of evidence for most of the important outcomes in oncoplastic surgery with lack of any randomized data and absence of standard tools for evaluation of clinical outcomes and especially patients’ values.

Despite areas of controversy, about one-third (36%) of panel members expressed a strong recommendation in support of oncoplastic BCS. Presumably, this reflects a synthesis of views on the relative complexity of these techniques, associated complications, impact on quality of life and costs.

Clinical Significance of Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery and Application of Volume-Displacement Technique

ABSTRACT

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer has been continuously developing in recent years, and it has become an important part of breast cancer surgery. Its safety and aesthetics have been widely recognized by domestic and foreign experts. However, due to the complexity and diversity of individuals and diseases, and the need for integrating the thinking of breast surgery and plastic surgery, it is still a challenge for breast surgeons. This review summarizes the pros and cons of its clinical application through a comprehensive discussion of hot issues in oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery and introduces common volume-displacement techniques in the clinic for reference by doctors in daily work.