Extreme oncoplastic conservation is a safe new alternative to mastectomy

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes in women offered oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery as an alternative to mastectomy: ANTHEM multicentre prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery may be a better option than mastectomy, but high-quality comparative evidence is lacking. The aim of the ANTHEM study (ISRCTN18238549) was to explore clinical and patient-reported outcomes in a multicentre cohort of women offered oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery as an alternative to mastectomy with or without immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

Women with invasive/pre-invasive breast cancer who were offered oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery with volume replacement or displacement techniques to avoid mastectomy were recruited prospectively. Demographic, operative, oncological, and 3- and 12-month complication data were collected. The proportion of women choosing oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery and the proportion in whom breast conservation was successful were calculated. Participants completed the validated BREAST-Q questionnaire at baseline, 3 months after surgery, and 12 months after surgery. Questionnaires were scored according to the developers' instructions and scores for each group were compared over time.

RESULTS

In total, 362 women from 32 UK breast units participated, of whom 294 (81.2%) chose oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery. Of the oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery patients in whom postoperative margin status was reported, 210 of 255 (82.4%) had clear margins after initial surgery and only 10 (3.9%) required completion mastectomy. Major complications were significantly more likely after immediate breast reconstruction. Women having oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery with volume displacement techniques reported significant improvements in baseline 'satisfaction with breasts' and 'psychosocial well-being' scores at 3 and 12 months, but both oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery groups reported significant decreases in 'physical well-being: chest' at 3 and 12 months.

CONCLUSION

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery allows greater than 95% of women to avoid mastectomy, with lower major complication rates than immediate breast reconstruction, and may improve satisfaction with outcome. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery should be offered as an alternative to mastectomy in all women in whom it is technically feasible.

Bilobed lateral artery perforator-based flap for partial breast reconstruction - Technique description and results from a ten-year cohort

INTRODUCTION

We present a new technique, the bilobed lateral artery perforator-based flap, for breast-conserving surgery of large central tumors or nearby, combining Zymany's bilobed flap and a Lateral Intercostal Perforator (LICAP) flap, and its 10-year outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We studied 37 patients with malignant breast tumors near or involving the central skin, without ptosis or desire to correct it, who avoided mastectomy with this modified bilobed flap from 2013 to 2022. The same surgeon operated on them in different institutions. This research project was approved by our ethical committee (n. 2.322.212).

RESULTS

The mean age was 57.17 (±12.60) years. The mean specimen weight was 74.32 (±25.84)g, and the mean tumor size was 40.35 (±15.81) mm. Fourteen (37.84 %) tumors were larger than 5 cm and one was multicentric. Thirty-two (86.49 %) patients had invasive ductal carcinomas. Nipple areola complex was removed in 19 (51.35 %) cases due to clinical involvement, and immediately reconstructed in two cases with contralateral free grafting. Twenty-one (56.76 %) patients received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Three (8.11 %) patients had immediate contralateral mastopexy. Radiotherapy was indicated in all cases. There were 3 (8.11 %) minor complications, one positive margin, and no surgical revisions. In a mean follow-up of 39.97 (±29.43) months, there were no local recurrences, 2 metastasis, and one death. Satisfaction and aesthetic results were good or excellent in most cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The new technique enabled breast conservation, with high rates of free margins, high levels of satisfaction, few complications in women with large central tumors on small breasts with limited ptosis.

Comparing Costs: Does Extreme Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery Confer a Cost Benefit When Compared with Mastectomy and Reconstruction?

INTRODUCTION

Extreme oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (eOBCS) describes the application of OBCS to patients who would otherwise need a mastectomy, and its safety has been previously described.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the costs of eOBCS and mastectomy.

METHODS

We reviewed our institutional database to identify breast cancer patients treated surgically from 2018 to 2023. We included patients with a large disease span (≥5 cm) and multifocal/multicentric disease. Patients were grouped by their surgical approach, i.e. eOBCS or mastectomy. The direct costs of care were determined and compared; however, indirect costs were not included.

RESULTS

Eighty-six patients met the inclusion criteria, 10 (11.6%) of whom underwent mastectomy and 76 (88.4%) who underwent eOBCS. Six mastectomy patients (60%) had reconstruction and 6 (60%) underwent external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Reconstructions were completed in a staged fashion, and the mean cost of the index operation (mastectomy and tissue expander) was $17,816. These patients had one to three subsequent surgeries to complete their reconstruction, at a mean cost of $45,904. The mean cost of EBRT was $5542. Thirty-four eOBCS patients (44.7%) underwent 44 margin re-excisions, including 6 (7.9%) who underwent mastectomy. Sixty (78.9%) of the eOBCS patients had EBRT. The mean cost of their index operation was $6345; the mean cost of a re-excision was $3615; the mean cost of their mastectomies with reconstruction was $49,400; and the mean cost of EBRT was $6807. The cost of care for eOBCS patients remained lower than that for mastectomy patients, i.e. $17,318 versus $57,416.

CONCLUSION

eOBCS is associated with a lower cost than mastectomy and had a low conversion rate to mastectomy.

Breast Conservation Project: Clinical Outcomes of Extreme Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Therapy Versus Mastectomy for Large and Multiple Lesions

INTRODUCTION

Patients with multiple or large malignant breast lesions are classically considered mastectomy candidates, but extreme oncoplastic breast-conservation surgery (eOBCS) has become an alternative approach. There is a paucity of outcomes data comparing eOBCS with mastectomy.

METHODS

We reviewed our prospectively maintained, single-institution database. We included patients with non-metastatic breast cancer with multiple ipsilateral or single large (≥ 5 cm) malignant breast lesions identified preoperatively who underwent either eOBCS or mastectomy. Patient demographics, clinicopathologic features, and surgical, oncologic, and cosmetic outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

Seventy-six (88%) patients underwent eOBCS and 10 (12%) underwent mastectomy. Median follow-up was 24.8 months. Mastectomy patients had larger lesions than eOBCS patients (median 70 mm vs. 32.5 mm; p = 0.06). Six (60%) index mastectomy patients underwent at least one additional surgery. For eOBCS patients, 34 (44%) required re-excision, 7 of whom underwent more than one subsequent surgery to obtain negative margins, and 6 (7.9%) ultimately underwent mastectomy. For patients undergoing additional surgery (n = 40), median time between index and final operation was 315 days for mastectomy versus 21 days for eOBCS patients (p < 0.001). Mastectomy patients more frequently experienced complications (p = 0.001) and underwent cosmetic revision (p < 0.001). There was no difference in cosmetic scores, and eOBCS patients reported less pain (p = 0.009). There were two local and three distant recurrences in the eOBCS cohort and one distant recurrence in the mastectomy group.

CONCLUSION

Breast conservation was attainable in over 90% of eOBCS patients. Increased postoperative complications and discomfort and longer duration of surgical treatment in mastectomy patients without oncologic superiority should drive informed patient discussions.

Laparoscopically harvested omental flap for immediate breast reconstruction: a retrospective single-center study of 300 cases

BACKGROUND

The laparoscopically harvested omental flap (LHOF) has been used in partial or total breast reconstruction, but most studies on LHOF were case reports or small case series. However, the clinical feasibility and oncological safety of LHOF in oncoplastic breast surgery remains controversial. This study reported our experience applying LHOF for immediate breast reconstruction.

METHODS

Between June 2018 and March 2022, 300 patients underwent oncoplastic breast surgery using LHOF at our institution. Their clinicopathological data, complications, cosmetic outcomes, and oncologic outcomes were evaluated.

RESULTS

All patients underwent total breast reconstruction using LHOF after nipple-sparing mastectomy. The median operation time was 230 min (ranging from 155 to 375 min). The median operation time for harvesting the omental flap was 55 min (ranging from 40 to 105 min). The success rate of the laparoscopically harvested pedicled omental flap was over 99.0%. Median blood loss was 70 ml, ranging from 40 to 150 ml. The volume of the flap was insufficient in 102 patients (34.0%). The overall complication rate was 12.3%. Subcutaneous fluid in the breast area (7%) was the most common reconstruction-associated complication, but most cases were relieved spontaneously. The incidence rate of omental flap necrosis was 3.3%. LHOF-associated complications occurred in two cases, including one case of incisional hernia and one case of vascular injury. Cosmetic outcomes were satisfactory in 95.1% of patients on a four-point scale by three-panel assessment and 97.2% using the BCCT.core software. Two local and one systemic recurrence were observed during a median follow-up period of 32 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The LHOF for immediate breast reconstruction is a safe and feasible method that involves minimal donor-site morbidity, satisfactory cosmetic outcomes, and promising oncologic safety.

Extreme oncoplasty: past, present and future

Breast surgery has evolved from mastectomy to breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Breast oncoplastic surgery later emerged with the inclusion and development of techniques used in plastic surgery for breast neoplasms. Recently, a new paradigm has been considered for mastectomy candidates with large multifocal and multicentric tumours, designated extreme oncoplasty (EO), which has allowed new techniques to be applied to tumours that would have been ineligible for BCS before. There are few publications and no uniform descriptions grouping all the technical possibilities and new indications together. We performed this a review with the objective of evaluating the indications and surgeries performed in the EO context, representing a new perspective for BCS. We observed new indications as extensive microcalcifications, locally advanced breast carcinoma with partial response to chemotherapy, small to moderate-sized non-ptotic central tumours and extreme ptosis. Small breasts are able for EO since the presence of ptosis. New surgeries are reported as disguised geometric compensation, perforators flaps, local/regional flaps, latissimus dorsi miniflap and partial breast amputation. It is important to decrease barriers to oncoplastic surgery if we want to increase the use of EO and BCS rates.

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.

Aesthetic results were more satisfactory after oncoplastic surgery than after total breast reconstruction according to patients and surgeons

INTRODUCTION

Patient satisfaction after breast cancer surgery has an impact on body image, sexual function, self-esteem, and quality of life and may differ from the perception of the attending physician. This study aimed to compare the aesthetic outcomes and satisfaction with conservative oncoplastic surgeries, mastectomies, and total breast reconstruction.

METHODS

We included 760 women diagnosed with invasive breast carcinoma or phyllodes tumors who returned at least 6 months after surgery or radiotherapy at two public hospitals and a private clinic between 2014 and 2022. Data was collected prospectively from patients and retrospectively from their medical records using a specific form after obtaining their informed consent. Aesthetic outcomes and quality of life were assessed using the BREAST-Q©, Harris Scale, and BCCT.core software. Data were evaluated using the SPSS statistical software. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05. This study was approved by the hospital ethics committees.

RESULTS

A total of 405 (53.29%) partial and 355 (46.71%) total reconstructions were included. Patients who underwent partial reconstruction were older and had higher body mass index. Patients who underwent total reconstruction had larger tumors with advanced clinical and pathological stages. Clinical and surgical complications occurred more frequently in the total reconstruction group. A greater number of reparative surgeries and lipofilling procedures were required for total reconstruction. According to the BREAST-Q, the partial reconstruction group showed significantly higher levels of women's satisfaction with their breasts, the surgical outcomes, psychosocial and sexual well-being, provision of information, and the reconstructive surgeon. Only physical well-being was slightly higher in the total reconstruction group. In most cases, the results were rated good or excellent. Physicians considered partial reconstructions to have better results than total reconstructions, although this difference was not perceived by the BCCT.core software.

CONCLUSION

Women who underwent partial breast reconstruction had higher levels of satisfaction in several domains, lower frequency of complications, and required fewer surgeries to complete their reconstruction than women who underwent total reconstruction. Physicians were also more satisfied with the results of partial reconstructions.

Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery with Extreme Oncoplasty

Introduction

We aimed to report the long-term surgical outcomes of extreme oncoplasty techniques in selected patients with unifocal (UF)/cT3 or multifocal-multicentric tumors (MFMC).

Material and Methods

Patients who were initially recommended to have mastectomy underwent extreme oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (eOBCS) including therapeutic reduction mammoplasty, racquet, and round-block mammoplasty, Grisotti flap, or combined technique were included. Preoperative tumor parameters, clinical outcomes, rate of local recurrence, survival, and patients' satisfaction were assessed.

Results

Eighty-six patients with a median age of 51 years were followed for a median follow-up of 75 (8-154) months; 31 (36%) had cT3 and 55 (64%) had MFMC tumors. The majority of patients (83.6%) had invasive cancer. The median UF tumor size was 58 mm (range 51-100) on imaging and 51 mm (range 50-60) on final pathology. The median tumor span for MFMC was 65 mm (range 53-95) on imaging, whereas the median of the largest tumor size was 30 mm (range 22-60) on final pathology. Seventy-one patients (82.5%) were ER-positive, 17 (19.7%) were HER2 positive, and 8 (9.3%) were triple-negative breast cancer. Four patients (4.7%) required further intervention for having positive margins (3 re-excisions, 1 completion mastectomy). Three local recurrences (3.4%) and 10 (11.6%) distant metastasis occurred. The cosmetic outcome was excellent in 37 (43%) patients. No major complications were observed.

Conclusions

eOBCS can be a good option for patients who initially require mastectomy. Appropriate patient selection, a multidisciplinary approach, and patient consent are essential steps of the procedure.

Clinical and patient-reported outcomes in oncoplastic breast conservation surgery from a single surgeon's practice in a busy community hospital in Canada

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast surgery aims to maintain quality of life by pre-empting and mitigating against breast asymmetry while not compromising oncological effectiveness. This case series demonstrates the implementation of an effective oncoplastic surgical practice in a community hospital within Canada and shows low rates of perioperative complications as well as high levels of patient-reported outcome measures.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients diagnosed with stage 0-3 breast cancer treated with level I and level II oncoplastic techniques by a single breast surgeon was undertaken. Patient, tumour, procedure, and outcome data were collected. Patient satisfaction was assessed with the Breast-Q questionnaire administered pre- and postoperatively.

RESULTS

Oncoplastic breast conservation surgery was performed on 340 patients over a 31-month period. The average size of breast lesions was 1.8 cm, with 96 patients having lesions 2-5 cm in size and 10 patients having tumours larger than 5 cm. Thirty (8.8%) patients experienced a complication requiring intervention. The positive margin rate was 9.4%, and the completion mastectomy rate was 4.7%. Breast Q scores increased across breast satisfaction, process of care, psychosocial, physical, and sexual satisfaction domains postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

This case series demonstrates the feasibility of an oncoplastic breast surgery practice in a busy community hospital in Canada. This adds to the growing body of North American data on the clinical and oncological safety of these techniques and introduces the idea of collecting patient-reported outcome measures within a Canadian population. We hope that this enables these techniques to become the standard of care in North America.

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.

Outcome reporting in therapeutic mammaplasty: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Therapeutic mammaplasty (TM) is an oncological procedure which combines tumour resection with breast reduction and mastopexy techniques. Previous systematic reviews have demonstrated the oncological safety of TM but reporting of critically important outcomes, such as quality of life, aesthetic and functional outcomes, are limited, piecemeal or inconsistent. This systematic review aimed to identify all outcomes reported in clinical studies of TM to facilitate development of a core outcome set.

METHODS

Medline, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched from inception to 5 August 2020. Included studies reported clinical outcomes following TM for adult women. Two authors screened articles independently for eligibility. Data were extracted regarding the outcome definition and classification type (for example, oncological, quality of life, etc.), time of outcome reporting and measurement tools.

RESULTS

Of 5709 de-duplicated records, 148 were included in the narrative synthesis. The majority of studies (n = 102, 68.9 per cent) reported measures of survival and/or recurrence; approximately three-quarters (n = 75, 73.5 per cent) had less than 5 years follow-up. Aesthetic outcome was reported in half of studies (n = 75, 50.7 per cent) using mainly subjective, non-validated measurement tools. The time point at which aesthetic assessment was conducted was highly variable, and only defined in 48 (64.0 per cent) studies and none included a preoperative baseline for comparison. Few studies reported quality of life (n = 30, 20.3 per cent), functional outcomes (n = 5, 3.4 per cent) or resource use (n = 28, 18.9 per cent).

CONCLUSION

Given the oncological equivalence of TM and mastectomy, treatment decisions are often driven by aesthetic and functional outcomes, which are infrequently and inconsistently reported with non-validated measurement tools.

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 Mammoplasty with disguised geometric compensation

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the results of a cohort of patients submitted to a new technique of oncoplastic mammoplasty, referred to as Disguised Geometric Compensation Mammoplasty (GCM), which is suitable for tumours involving the glandular tissue in the pillars of the mammoplasty.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-five breast tumours involving the pillars of the mammoplasty were included, 20 (80.0%) invasive ductal carcinomas, 3 (12.0%) phyllodes tumours, 1 (4.0%) invasive lobular carcinoma, and 1 (4.0%) in situ ductal carcinoma. Preoperative markings followed the "Wise-pattern" technique. The resection of the tumour in the pillar, preserving the overlying skin, was geometrically compensated with a corresponding area coming from the lower poles, which folded over itself and maintained the skin vascularity in the pillar. One patient was converted to classic GCM due to a positive skin margin in the frozen section. Another patient combined a Classic GCM for the inner quadrants and a Disguised GCM for the outer quadrants on the same breast. One patient decided to undergo a bilateral mastectomy after some months because of a BRCA 1 mutation. Immediate fat grafting was done in one case. Approval from the ethics committee: n. 2.322.212.

RESULTS

Mean age was 47.0 ± 9.5 years. Mean clinical tumour size was 47.2 ± 22.2mm before chemotherapy and 36.7 ± 22.5mm, after. There were 11 (44.0%) locally advanced and 1 (4.00%) multicentric tumours. Nine (36.0%) were submitted to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Adjuvant treatment was indicated according to the necessity. Ptosis was corrected in all cases. The aesthetic results were rated as excellent or good in 21 (95.5%) cases, by the Harris scale and the BCCT.core. The BREAST-Q scores for the satisfaction with the breasts and satisfaction with outcomes were 81.5 (±15.0) and 90.4 (±11.7), respectively. Intraoperative frozen sections were done in 12 (48%) cases. There was 1 (4.0%) focus of DCIS in the skin margin treated with radiotherapy. Minor complications occurred in 6 (24.0%) patients. There was 1 (4.0%) local recurrence treated with radical mastectomy, and 1 (4.0%) metastasis after 3 months. No deaths were observed within a mean follow-up time of 16.3 ± 11.4 months.

CONCLUSIONS

The disguised geometric compensation mammoplasty allowed breast conservation in situations requiring large resection in the pillars of the mammoplasty, with a high rate of free margins, correction of ptosis, satisfactory symmetry, and few complications.

Advanced breast conservation and partial breast reconstruction - a review of current available options for oncoplastic breast surgery

Breast cancer is the most common cancer affecting one in three women with new cancer diagnosis in England. Breast-conserving surgery is the primary surgical option in a vast majority of these patients. Use of oncoplastic techniques in breast conservation surgery has significantly improved the aesthetic outcomes without compromising the oncological safety of cancer resections. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OPBCS) has transformed the specialty with a paradigm shift in ideology and the recognition that aesthetic and oncological resections are synonymous when planning surgical intervention for patients with breast cancer. The two main options for OPBCS are therapeutic mammoplasty and partial beast reconstruction using pedicle-based flaps. This review aims to highlight key concepts in OPBCS demonstrating an overview of these surgical techniques, their safety, outcomes and the emergence of extreme oncoplastic breast surgery.

Can supine breast magnetic resonance imaging help hit the target in extreme oncoplastic surgery?

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the clinical value of supine magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for tumor localization in breast cancer patients with large or multifocal tumors detected by prone MRI, scheduled for oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (OBCS). Outcomes were compared with those of patients who underwent wide local excision (WLE) or OBCS without MRI guidance.

METHODS

Over a 2-year period, consecutive patients with large or multifocal disease scheduled for OBCS with MRI-only findings were invited to participate (Group-1). Supplementary supine MRI was performed, and tumor margins were marked in the surgical position. Consecutive patients with early, non-palpable breast cancer who underwent WLE (Group-2) or OBCS (Group-3) were included for comparisons. The primary outcome was reoperation due to an insufficient margin. Secondary outcomes included surgical complications and delayed adjuvant treatment.

RESULTS

Altogether, 102 breasts (98 patients) were analyzed. All preoperative demographic data were comparable among the three groups. Multifocality, tumor-to-breast volume ratio, and the volume of excised breast tissue were significantly greater in Group-1 than in Groups-2 and 3. Operation time was longer and the need for axillary clearance or surgery for both breasts was more common in Groups-1 and 3 than in Group-2. Adequate margins were achieved in all patients in Groups-1 and 2, and one patient underwent re-excision in Group-3.

CONCLUSIONS

Supine MRI in the surgical position is a new, promising method to localize multifocal, large tumors visible on MRI. Its short-term outcomes were comparable with those of conventional WLE and OBCS.

Extreme Oncoplasty: Breast Conservation in Patients with Large, Multifocal, and Multicentric Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Extreme Oncoplastic Breast Conservation Surgery (EOBCS) is offered in selected patients with multifocal or multicentric breast cancer (MFMC). Recent evidence has suggested that EOBCS may be a valuable resource for patients with MFMC who may avoid the risk associated with mastectomy in favour of the benefits of breast conservation without risking their oncological outcomes. Our study examined the practice of EOBCS in two regional breast units in Glasgow, United Kingdom.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospectively collected database of 50 patients treated with EOBC in two breast units in Glasgow between 2007 and 2018 were evaluated, and clinical outcomes were observed.

RESULTS

Fifty patients (median age 55) underwent EOBCS, of which 43 (86%) had invasive disease. Median tumour size was 55mm (50-90) and multifocal disease was identified in 22 (44%) patients. Nine patients (18%) were found to have positive margins and underwent a second procedure, with 6 (12%) proceeding to mastectomy. Five-year disease free survival rate was 91.5%, while cancer-specific survival was 95.7%.

CONCLUSION

EOBCS is oncologically safe in short-term follow-up. Large scale studies are required to confirm these preliminary results, in order to offer EOBCS as a valid option to patients with advanced or multifocal breast cancer.

Improving Results in Oncoplastic Surgery

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the risks, benefits, and safety profile of oncoplastic procedures for partial breast reconstruction, and how they compare to breast conservation-therapy alone. 2. Have a working knowledge of oncoplastic techniques and how they are addressed from the multidisciplinary perspective. 3. Understand the limitations of oncoplastic techniques and how to avoid unfavorable results.

SUMMARY

Oncoplastic surgical techniques have expanded indications for breast conservation and have improved both oncologic and reconstructive outcomes. This article will focus on some of the barriers to adoption and discuss ways to improve safety through streamlining the process, understanding the oncologic concerns, and evaluating unfavorable outcomes that might interfere with the appropriate delivery of breast cancer care.

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.