Nipple-sparing mastectomy with different approaches: surgical incisions, complications, and cosmetic results. Preliminary results of 100 consecutive patients at a single center

Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robotic Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES): a prospective cohort study of the Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) and Korean Breast Cancer Study Group (KBCSG)

BACKGROUND

Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has emerged as a new treatment option for breast cancer and risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) for women who have a high risk of pathogenic variants. Even though several studies have reported that RNSM is a feasible procedure, some argue that it should only be performed by specialized surgeons, and data on oncologic outcomes and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are limited. Recently, the United States Food and Drug Administration and several surgeons warned that robotic breast surgery should be performed only by specialized surgeons and recommended that the benefits, risks, and alternatives of all available treatment options be discussed with patients so they can make informed treatment decisions. The Korea Robot-Endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG) has been established to evaluate, standardize, and teach this state-of-the-art procedure. We have designed a multicenter prospective cohort study entitled Mastectomy with Reconstruction Including Robot Endoscopic Surgery (MARRES) to report surgical, PRO, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

MARRES is a multi-institution cohort study prospectively collecting data from patients undergoing mastectomy and reconstruction. The patient inclusion criteria are adult women older than 19 with breast cancer or a high risk of breast cancer (patients with BRCA1/2, TP53, PALB2 mutations, etc.), who have scheduled therapeutic or RRM and want immediate reconstruction. Surgical outcomes, including pre- and postoperative photos, oncologic outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and PRO, are collected. The primary endpoints are postoperative complication rates within 30 postoperative days and the Clavien-Dindo grade of postoperative complications within 180 postoperative days. The secondary endpoints are 5-year postoperative recurrence-free survival and cancer incidence rate (for those who underwent RRM), patient satisfaction with reconstruction expectations preoperative (baseline) and results within 6 to 12 postoperative months, surgeon satisfaction with postoperative results in 6 postoperative months, and cost-effectiveness of the definitive surgery. Patient recruitment will be completed in April 2025, and the target number of enrolled patients is 2000.

DISCUSSION

This study will provide evidence about the surgical outcomes, oncologic outcomes, and patient satisfaction with RNSM and endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), compared with conventional NSM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT04585074. Registered April 8, 2020.

Trends and issues in clinical research on satisfaction and quality of life after mastectomy and breast reconstruction: a 5-year scoping review

Breast reconstruction (BR) aims to improve the satisfaction and quality of life (QOL) of breast cancer survivors. Clinical studies using patient-reported outcomes (PROs) can therefore provide relevant information to the patients and support decision-making. This scoping review was conducted to analyze recent trends in world regions, methods used, and factors investigated. The literature search was conducted in August 2022. Databases of PubMed, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched for relevant English-language studies published from 2017 to 2022. Studies involving women with breast cancer who underwent BR after mastectomy and investigated PROs after BR using BR-specific scales were included. Data on the country, publication year, study design, PRO measures (PROMs) used, time points of surveys, and research themes were collected. In total, 147 articles met the inclusion criteria. BREAST-Q was the most widely used, contributing to the increase in the number and diversification of studies in this area. Such research has been conducted mainly in North America and Europe and is still developing in Asia and other regions. The research themes involved a wide range of clinical and patient factors in addition to surgery, which could be influenced by research methods, time since surgery, and even cultural differences. Recent BR-specific PROMs have led to a worldwide development of research on factors that affect satisfaction and QOL after BR. PRO after BR may be influenced by local cultural and social features, and it would be necessary to accumulate data in each region to draw clinically useful conclusion.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) and Microinvasive DCIS: Role of Surgery in Early Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

Advances in treatments, screening, and awareness have led to continually decreasing breast cancer-related mortality rates in the past decades. This achievement is coupled with early breast cancer diagnosis. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and microinvasive breast cancer have increasingly been diagnosed in the context of mammographic screening. Clinical management of DCIS is heterogenous, and the clinical significance of microinvasion in DCIS remains elusive, although microinvasive DCIS (DCIS-Mi) is distinct from "pure" DCIS. Upfront surgery has a fundamental role in the overall treatment of these breast diseases. The growing number of screen-detected DCIS diagnoses with clinicopathological features of low risk for local recurrence (LR) allows more conservative surgical options, followed by personalised adjuvant radiotherapy plans. Furthermore, studies are underway to evaluate the validity of surgery omission in selected low-risk categories. Nevertheless, the management, the priority of axillary surgical staging, and the prognosis of DCIS-Mi remain the subject of debate, demonstrating how the paucity of data still necessitates adequate studies to provide conclusive guidelines. The current scientific scenario for DCIS and DCIS-Mi surgical approach consists of highly controversial and diversified sources, which this narrative review will delineate and clarify.

Ptotic versus Nonptotic Breasts in Nipple-sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Prepectoral Breast Reconstruction

In recent years, nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by implant-based breast reconstruction has gained popularity due to improved cosmetic and psychological benefits. However, patients with ptotic breasts remain the main challenge for surgeons, owing to the potential risk of postoperative complications.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was performed for patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy and prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction between March 2017 and November 2021. Patient demographics, incidence of complications, and quality of life assessed using the BREAST-Q questionnaire were compared between the two different incisions [inverted-T for ptotic versus inframammary fold (IMF) for nonptotic breasts].

Results

A total of 98 patients were examined: 62 in the IMF cohort and 36 in the inverted-T cohort. The results demonstrated equivalence in the safety metrics between the two groups, including hematoma (p=0.367), seroma (p=0.552), infection (P = 1.00), skin necrosis (P = 1.00), local recurrence (P = 1.00), implant loss (P = 0.139), capsular contracture (P = 1.00), and nipple-areolar complex necrosis (P = 0.139). The BREAST-Q scores were equally high in both groups.

Conclusion

Our results suggest that inverted-T incision for ptotic breasts is a safe modality with similar complication rates and high aesthetic results compared with IMF incision for nonptotic breasts. A higher rate of nipple-areolar complex necrosis in the inverted-T group, although not significant, should be considered during careful preoperative planning and patient selection.

Prediction of Implant Size Based on Breast Volume Using Mammography with Fully Automated Measurements and Breast MRI

BACKGROUND

Determination of implant size is crucial for patients with breast cancer undergoing one-stage breast reconstruction. The purpose of this study is to predict the implant size based on the breast volume measured by mammography (MG) with a fully automated method, and by breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with a semi-automated method, in breast cancer patients with direct-to-implant reconstruction.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This retrospective study included 84 patients with breast cancer who underwent direct-to-implant reconstruction after nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy and preoperative MG and MRI between April 2015 and April 2019. Breast volume was measured using (a) MG with a fully automated commercial software and (b) MRI with an in-house semi-automated software program. Multivariable regression analyses including breast volume and patient weight (P < 0.05 in univariable analysis) were conducted to predict implant size.

RESULTS

MG and MRI breast volume was highly correlated with both implant size (correlation coefficient 0.862 and 0.867, respectively; P values < 0.001) and specimen weight (correlation coefficient 0.802 and 0.852, respectively; P values < 0.001). Mean absolute difference between the MR breast volume and implant size was 160 cc, which was significantly higher than that between the MG breast volume and implant size of 118 cc (P < 0.001). On multivariable analyses, only breast volume measured by both MG and MRI was significantly associated with implant size in any implant type (all P values < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Breast volume measured by MG and MRI can be used to predict appropriate implant size in breast cancer patients undergoing direct-to-implant reconstruction in an efficient and objective manner.

Advances and controversies in management of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer. It accounts for 25% of all breast cancers diagnosed, as a result of the expansion of breast cancer screening and is associated with a high survival rate. DCIS is particularly clinically challenging, due to its heterogeneous pathological and biological traits and its management is continually evolving towards more personalized and less aggressive therapies. This article suggests evidence-based guidelines for proper DCIS clinical management, which should be discussed within a multidisciplinary team in order to propose the most suitable approach in clinical practice, taking into account recent scientific studies. Here we include updated multidisciplinary treatment protocols and techniques in accordance with the most recent contributions published on this topic in the peer-reviewed medical literature, and we outline future perspectives.

Breast Cancer Surgery: New Issues

Since ancient times, breast cancer treatment has crucially relied on surgeons and clinicians making great efforts to find increasingly conservative approaches to cure the tumor. In the Halstedian era (mid-late 19th century), the predominant practice consisted of the radical and disfiguring removal of the breast, much to the detriment of women's psycho-physical well-being. Thanks to enlightened scientists such as Professor Umberto Veronesi, breast cancer surgery has since impressively progressed and adopted a much more conservative approach. Over the last three decades, a better understanding of tumor biology and of its significant biomarkers has made the assessment of genetic and molecular profiles increasingly important. At the same time, neo-adjuvant treatments have been introduced, and great improvements in genetics, imaging technologies and in both oncological and reconstructive surgical techniques have been made. The future of breast cancer management must now rest on an ever more precise and targeted type of surgery that, through an increasingly multidisciplinary and personalized approach, can ensure oncological radicality while offering the best possible quality of life.

Is Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Indicated after Previous Breast Surgery? A Series of 387 Institutional Cases

BACKGROUND

Previous breast surgery does not represent an absolute contraindication for nipple-sparing mastectomy, although it may negatively interfere with surgical outcomes. The aim of the authors' study was to confirm the feasibility of nipple-sparing mastectomy after previous breast surgery, focusing on skin incisions and risk factors, complications, and oncologic outcomes.

METHODS

The authors retrospectively identified 368 patients who underwent 387 nipple-sparing mastectomies and reconstruction after previous surgery (quadrantectomy, breast resection, augmentation and reduction mammaplasty, mastopexy) at the European Institute of Oncology from January of 2003 to November of 2017. Patterns of skin incisions (i.e., radial, hemiperiareolar, periareolar, vertical pattern, inframammary fold, Wise-pattern, and round-block) for primary surgery and for mastectomy, type of reconstruction, and radiotherapy have been recorded. The authors collected data regarding early and late complications and further operations (implant change, fat grafting) performed within 2 years to improve cosmetic outcomes. Oncologic follow-up has been reported for in-breast recurrences.

RESULTS

Complete and partial nipple-areola complex necrosis occurred, respectively, in 2.8 percent and in 5.4 percent of cases. The authors recorded 5.4 percent failures resulting in implant removal. The analysis of risk factors for complications or for the need for further operations showed no significant association with skin incision for first surgery and mastectomy, use of the same skin incision, previous radiotherapy, or type of primary surgery. Five-year overall survival and disease-free survival were 99.1 and 93.8 percent, respectively. No nipple recurrence was recorded.

CONCLUSIONS

The authors' results confirm that nipple-sparing mastectomy can be a safe surgical procedure after previous breast surgery. Surgical planning should be tailored to each patient.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Hereditary Gastric and Breast Cancer Syndromes Related to CDH1 Germline Mutation: A Multidisciplinary Clinical Review

E-cadherin (CDH1 gene) germline mutations are associated with the development of diffuse gastric cancer in the context of the so-called hereditary diffuse gastric syndrome, and with an inherited predisposition of lobular breast carcinoma. In 2019, the international gastric cancer linkage consortium revised the clinical criteria and established guidelines for the genetic screening of CDH1 germline syndromes. Nevertheless, the introduction of multigene panel testing in clinical practice has led to an increased identification of E-cadherin mutations in individuals without a positive family history of gastric or breast cancers. This observation motivated us to review and present a novel multidisciplinary clinical approach (nutritional, surgical, and image screening) for single subjects who present germline CDH1 mutations but do not fulfil the classic clinical criteria, namely those identified as-(1) incidental finding and (2) individuals with lobular breast cancer without family history of gastric cancer (GC).

Transumbilical Single-port Robotically Assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: A Cadaveric Study

The authors performed a transumbilical, single-port robotically assisted, nipple-sparing mastectomy on a cadaveric model to assess technical feasibility. Surgeon-controlled, robotic-wristed instrumentation, as well as 3-dimensional high definition (HD) vision allowed the entire dissection to be performed through a single incision placed in the umbilicus. The technique warrants further exploration and development before any application in clinical applied research.

Multicentric breast cancer with heterogeneous histopathology: a multidisciplinary review

Multiple synchronous (multifocal or multicentric) ipsilateral breast cancers with heterogeneous histopathology are a rare clinical occurrence, however, their incidence is increasing due to the use of MRI for breast cancer screening and staging. Some studies have demonstrated poorer clinical outcomes for this pattern of breast cancer, but there is no evidence to guide clinical practice. In this multidisciplinary review, we reflect on pathology and molecular characteristics, imaging findings, surgical management including conservation and reconstructive options and approach to the axilla, and the role of chemotherapy and radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary discussions appear decisive in planning an appropriate surgical choice and defining the correct systemic treatment tailored to each clinical condition.

Bipedicled Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Versus Traditional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Comparison of 2 Alternative Techniques in Order to Save Nipple-Areola Complex

BACKGROUND

Nipple-areola complex-sparing mastectomy (NSM) represents, when a mastectomy is unavoidable, the best treatment possible that can be offered to attenuate the negative impact of surgery on patients' quality of life. Unfortunately, NSM can be used only in selected patients with small and nonptotic breasts. In order to save the nipple-areola complex (NAC) also in patients with large and ptotic breast, otherwise subjected to a skin-sparing mastectomy with the sacrifice of the NAC, we described the bipedicled nipple-sparing mastectomy (BNSM). The aim of this study is to obtain a formal outcome assessment of BNSM and analyze the complications rate of this technique compared with traditional NSM. We furthermore attempt to describe the surgical procedures present in the literature that allow to preserve NAC also in large and ptotic breasts presenting the complication rates observed and comparing with our technique. Aesthetic outcome has also been evaluated.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 42 procedures of consecutive patients undergoing immediate reconstruction with tissue expanders after NSM (20 patients) or BNSM (19 patients). We divided them in 2 groups focused on surgical complications and aesthetic outcome.

RESULTS

On a total of 42 procedures, the principal major complication was dehiscence of surgical wound procedures needing 1-day surgery revision occurring in 3 (14.3%) of the BNSM group and 1 (4.8%) of the NSM group, whereas as principal minor complication 4 partial NAC necrosis not requiring surgery in BNSM (19%) and 2 (9.5%) in NSM. No tissue expanders required explantation. Concerning cosmetic results, the overall appearance of the breast and NAC was acceptable in 85.7 % and 77.2%, respectively, in the NSM group and 80.7% and 66.7%, respectively, in the BNSM group.

CONCLUSIONS

Bipedicled nipple-sparing mastectomy is a valid technique to improve patients' quality of life in large and ptotic breasts otherwise candidate to a skin-sparing mastectomy, but only a progressive learning curve can minimize complications. No significant statistical differences have been observed in terms of complication rates and aesthetical outcomes between the 2 groups. An accurate selection of patients is mandatory in order to obtain low complication rates and good aesthetical outcome.

Mammary adenectomy followed by immediate reconstruction for treatment of patients with early-infiltrating breast carcinoma: a cohort study

BACKGROUND

Use of mammary adenectomy for breast carcinoma treatment remains controversial.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to verify the oncological safety of mammary adenectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for treating selected patients with infiltrating breast carcinoma and to evaluate patients' satisfaction with the reconstructed breasts.

DESIGN AND SETTING

Cohort study conducted among patients treated at Hospital Sírio-Libanês, São Paulo, Brazil.

METHODS

This study was based on 152 selected patients (161 operated breasts) with infiltrating breast carcinoma who underwent mammary adenectomy and immediate breast reconstruction. In all patients, the diameter of the largest focus of the tumor was less than 3.0 cm, the imaging tumor-nipple distance was greater than 2.0 cm and the pathological assessment showed clear margins. The cumulative incidence of local recurrence (LR), recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) curves were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. After at least one year of follow-up, 64 patients were asked about their satisfaction with the reconstructed breast(s).

RESULTS

At a mean follow-up time of 43.5 months, seven cases of LR (4.4%), four distant metastases (2.6%) and five deaths (3.3%) were recorded. The five-year actuarial LR-free survival, RFS and OS were 97.6%, 98.3% and 98.3%, respectively. No cases of nipple-areolar complex recurrence were reported. Forty-one patients (64%) indicated a high level of satisfaction with the reconstructed breasts.

CONCLUSIONS

Mammary adenectomy is a safe and efficacious procedure for selected patients with early-infiltrating breast carcinoma and results in a high rate of patient satisfaction with the reconstructed breasts.