Time to Radiation After Oncoplastic Reduction

The Oncological and Surgical Outcomes of Immediate Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction With Contralateral Breast Adjustment

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic surgery is an expanding approach for managing breast conservation because it offers improved cosmetic outcomes while maintaining oncological safety.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess the oncological and surgical outcomes of patients who underwent oncoplastic procedures at a single institution.

METHODS

The study population includes all consecutive breast cancer patients who underwent lumpectomy followed by immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction with contralateral breast adjustment between 2010 and 2021. Following IRB approval, patient demographics, tumor characteristics, surgical details, complications, and follow-up were evaluated for this group. Quality of life (QOL) and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed through questionnaires.

RESULTS

Following multidisciplinary tumor board discussion, 77 patients (82 breasts) underwent oncoplastic surgery. Of these, 92.2% underwent breast MRI prior to surgery with mean mass enhancement of 2.35 cm (range, 0-8.5 cm) and non-mass enhancement of 5.77 cm (range, 0-14 cm), and 44% presented with multifocal disease. The final positive surgical margin rate was 2.4%, and all conserved breasts received adjuvant radiation therapy. The 5-year local recurrence rate for invasive tumors was 4.1%. QOL scores were generally high, with most patients reporting good to excellent cosmetic outcomes and high personal satisfaction with breast appearance and softness. Physicians reported breast symmetry in 89.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that oncoplastic surgery with contralateral breast adjustment is safe, effective, and an excellent option for breast cancer patients wishing for breast conservation even for large or multifocal masses, with favorable oncologic and cosmetic outcomes. The QOL analysis indicates high patient satisfaction. These results support the use of oncoplastic surgery in the management of breast cancer.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4

The Local Rhombus-Shaped Flap-An Easy and Reliable Technique for Oncoplastic Breast Cancer Surgery and Defect Closure in Breast and Axilla

Primarily, breast-conserving therapy is an oncological intervention, but eventually it is judged by its cosmetic result. Remaining cavities from tumor resection can promote seromas, delay healing and cause lasting discomfort. Additionally, volume loss, dislocation of nipple/areola and fat necrosis lead to (cosmetically) unfavorable results, aggravated by radiotherapy. Oncoplastic surgery can reduce these sequelae. A local flap that has rarely been used in breast cancer surgery is the Limberg rhombic flap. The tumor defect is planned as a rhombus. The sides of the rhombus are of equal length and ideally have an angle of 60° and 120°. The flap that closes the defect is planned as an extension of equal length of the short diagonal. The second incision of the flap is placed according to the defect angle of 60°, running parallel to the defect at the same length. This creates a second rhombus. The flap is transposed into the defect, and the donor area is primarily closed. It is axially perfused and safe with a 1:1 length-to-width ratio. Compared to local perforator flaps, defect closure is easily managed without microsurgical skills. In the breast, the flap can be used in volume replacement and volume displacement techniques as an all-layer flap to cover defects, or it can be deepithelialized and buried. In the axilla, it can cover full-thickness defects when skin is involved. The advantages of the rhombic flap are its safety and simplicity to add volume and close defects, thus reducing the complexity of oncoplastic surgery.

Complications after Oncoplastic Breast Reduction and Impact on Time to Adjuvant Therapy

Background

Although lumpectomy with oncoplastic breast reduction (OBR) improves cosmetic results and ameliorates symptomatic macromastia, associated complications may delay adjuvant therapy.

Methods

This was a single-institution, retrospective study of OBRs (2015-2021). A major complication was defined as need for IV antibiotics, and/or operation under general anesthesia. Association of complications with delay to adjuvant therapy (chemotherapy, radiation) was assessed.

Results

In total, 282 patients were included. The major complication rate was 3.9%, and overall complication rate was 31.2%. The most common complication was incisional dehiscence (23.4%). Body mass index [BMI >35 (P < 0.0001)], diabetes (P = 0.02), and HgbA1c [>6.5 (P = 0.0002)] were significantly associated with having a major complication. The occurrence of any complication was associated with a delay in time to radiation (median 7 versus 8 weeks, P < 0.001). The occurrence of a major complication was associated with a more meaningful delay to radiation (median 7 versus 15 weeks, P = 0.002). Occurrence of any complication, or a major complication, was not associated with delay to chemotherapy.

Conclusions

The overall complication rate observed after OBR falls within the range reported in the literature. Patients with a BMI more than 35, diabetes, and/or HgbA1c more than 6.5 were at increased risk for a major complication, which was associated with a meaningful delay to radiation. Consideration may be given to partial mastectomy alone without oncoplastic reduction in patients with small tumors when the priority to avoid radiation delay is high (eg, high-risk tumors), or the risk of delay is high (eg, diabetic or BMI >35).

Oncoplastic Breast Reconstruction in Morbidly Obese Patients: An Acceptable Practice

Background

Breast cancer is the most common noncutaneous malignancy amongst women. Lumpectomy with adjuvant radiation is a mainstay of surgical treatment. Oncoplastic breast reconstruction reduces the resultant breast deformity. Obesity is a risk factor for the development of complications after breast reconstruction. This study's purpose was to determine if oncoplastic breast reconstruction is a safe procedure in obese patients.

Methods

A single institution retrospective chart review was performed on women undergoing oncoplastic breast reduction from 2009 to 2021. Patients were then divided into groups based on body mass index (BMI). A statistical analysis was performed comparing rates of complications and time to adjuvant therapy.

Results

An estimated 340 patients were identified with an average age of 56.2 years (140 with BMI <30 kg/m2, 87 with BMI 30-34.9 kg/m2, 62 with BMI 35-39.9 kg/m2, and 51 with BMI >40 kg/m2). There was a significant difference between the BMI greater than 40 kg per m2 and BMI less than 30 kg per m2 group in the number of returns to the operating room (P = 0.0096), major complications (P = 0.0002), and minor complications (P = 0.0051). Average time to adjuvant treatment was 47 days and there was no statistically significant difference between the groups (P = 0.1691).

Conclusions

There was a significant difference in major and minor complications between the BMI groups; however, there was no delay in the time to adjuvant therapy. Therefore, we conclude that with appropriate counseling on surgical risks, oncoplastic breast reduction is an acceptable option for breast cancer patients after lumpectomy, regardless of BMI.

Impact of Oncoplastic Surgery on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Breast Cancer

Background

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery (OPS) serves as a valuable technique that allows for immediate reconstruction at the time of resection. While the aim of OPS is to improve breast cosmesis, it is critical to ensure OPS does not negatively impact appropriate cancer treatment.

Methods

Based on current literature, this study provides a broad overview on the potential oncologic advantages of OPS for patients diagnosed with breast cancer.

Results

OPS has been shown to be a safe and reliable approach with oncologic advantages. More specifically, OPS broadens the indications for breast conservation therapy (BCT); allows for a more generous margin of resection, thus decreasing rates of re-excision; and provides the opportunity to sample additional breast tissue, which may detect occult disease. Reduction mammaplasty may also decrease the risk for developing breast cancer. Importantly, in the era of multimodality therapy, long-term oncologic outcomes and postoperative surveillance algorithms appear to be similar when comparing patients who undergo OPS and BCT.

Conclusions

For patients with breast cancer, oncoplastic surgery has emerged as a valuable technique to improve breast cosmesis while achieving optimal oncologic outcomes. As the landscape of breast oncology continues to evolve, it is critical for a multidisciplinary team to be involved to guide management and reconstructive strategies.

Effect of Delayed Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty on Radiation Treatment Delay Following Breast-Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the delay in initiating adjuvant radiation therapy (RT) after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) in patients with early-stage breast cancer who underwent oncoplastic reduction mammoplasty (ORM) following BCS compared with a matched cohort of patients who did not undergo ORM between BCS and RT.

METHODS

Medical records of 112 women (56 ORMs and 56 matched non-ORMs) with carcinoma in situ or early-stage breast cancer treated with BCS were reviewed. ORM was performed in a delayed manner following BCS, allowing confirmation of negative surgical margins. Time to RT was defined as time from last oncologic surgery to start of RT.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 6.8 years for the ORM cohort and 6.7 years for the control non-ORM cohort. Patients who underwent ORM following BCS experienced a significant delay in initiating RT (>8 weeks) than matched patients not undergoing ORM (66% vs. 34%; p < 0.001). Wound complications occurred in 44.6% (n = 25) of patients in the ORM cohort, which were mostly minor, including delayed wound healing and/or infection (39%). There was no significant difference in local recurrence between patients in the non-ORM and ORM cohorts (p = 0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that ORM following BCS has the potential to delay RT >8 weeks, largely as a result of increased risk of wound complications; however, this delay did not impact local control. ORM can be safely considered for appropriately selected patients with breast cancer.

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.

Time to Radiation after Oncoplastic Reduction versus After Lumpectomy

Prior studies contrasting oncoplastic reduction (OCR) to traditional lumpectomy have validated oncoplastic reduction surgery with similar survival and oncological outcomes. The purpose of this study was to evaluate if there was a significant difference in the time to initiation of radiation therapy after OCR in comparison with the standard breast-conserving therapy (lumpectomy).

Methods

The patients included were from a database of breast cancer patients who all underwent postoperative adjuvant radiation after either OCR or lumpectomy at a single institution between 2003 and 2020. Patients who experienced delays in radiation for nonsurgical reasons were excluded. Comparisons were made between the groups in the time to radiation and complication rates.

Results

A total of 487 patients underwent breast-conserving therapy, with 220 having undergone OCR and 267 lumpectomy patients. There was no significant difference in days to radiation between patient cohorts (60.5 OCR, 56.2 lumpectomy, P = 0.059). There was a significant difference in the number of complications between OCR and lumpectomy patients (20.4% OCR, 2.2% lumpectomy, P < 0.001). However, of patients who had complications, there was no significant difference in the number of days to radiation (74.3 OCR, 69.3 lumpectomy, P = 0.732).

Conclusions

Compared with lumpectomy, OCR was not associated with an increased time to radiation but was associated with higher complications. Statistical analysis did not reveal surgical technique or complications to be independent, significant predictors of increased time to radiation. Surgeons should be aware that although complications may remain higher in OCR, this does not necessarily translate to delays in radiation.

Immediate or delayed oncoplastic surgery after breast conserving surgery at the Netherlands Cancer Institute: a cohort study of 251 cases

PURPOSE

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) after breast conserving surgery is preferably performed during the same operation. Offering delayed OPS instead of mastectomy to patients with a high risk of tumor-positive margins allows breast conservation with the option of margin re-excision during OPS, without having to dismantle the reconstruction. We aimed to evaluate surgical outcomes after immediate and delayed OPS.

METHODS

We included early-stage breast cancer patients who underwent OPS at the Netherlands Cancer Institute between 2016 and 2019. Patients were selected for delayed OPS after multidisciplinary consultation if the risk of tumor-positive margins with immediate OPS was considered significant (> 30%). Groups were compared on baseline characteristics and short-term surgical outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 242 patients with 251 OPS, 130 (52%) OPS had neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Immediate OPS was performed in 176 (70%) cases and delayed OPS in 76 (30%). Selection for delayed OPS was associated with tumor size (OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.01-1.04), ILC (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.10-6.20), DCIS (OR 3.45, 95% CI 1.42-8.34) and bra size (OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.62-0.94). Delayed and immediate OPS differed in tissue weight (54 vs. 67 g, p = 0.034), tissue replacement (51% vs. 26%, p < .001) and tumor-positive margins (66% vs. 18%, p < .001). Re-excision was performed in 48 (63%) delayed OPS and in 11 (6%) immediate OPS. Groups did not differ in complications (21% vs. 18%, p = 0.333). Breast conservation after immediate and delayed OPS was 98% and 93%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Performing delayed OPS in selected cases facilitated simultaneous margin re-excision without increasing complications, and resulted in an excellent breast conservation rate.

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.

Single Center Oncoplastic Experience and Patient Satisfaction Reported via Patient Reported Outcomes

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OPS) is gaining in popularity compared with traditional breast conserving surgery due to wider resections and better satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes. This study analyzed OPS versus traditional breast conserving surgery outcomes: wound complications, reoperations for margins or fat necrosis, and ipsilateral recurrence.

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.

Comparing Outcomes after Oncoplastic Breast Reduction and Breast Reduction for Benign Macromastia

BACKGROUND

Recent studies suggest that oncoplastic breast reconstruction following partial mastectomy with concurrent symmetrizing breast reduction improves cosmetic outcomes when compared to standard breast conservation therapy alone. The authors studied whether tailoring a breast reduction to a cancer resection has an effect on complication rates by comparing (1) outcomes between oncoplastic breast reduction patients and breast reduction for benign macromastia patients and (2) complication rates between the cancer side and the symmetrizing side of an oncoplastic reduction.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed on female patients who underwent either oncoplastic breast reduction or bilateral breast reduction for benign macromastia between January of 2010 and October of 2018 performed by a single surgeon. Patient demographics, intraoperative data including operative approach, and postoperative outcomes were gathered from the electronic medical record and coded into a database. Specific outcomes tracked included surgical-site infection, hematoma, seroma, prolonged wound healing, nipple loss, loss of nipple sensation, fat necrosis, and revision. Chi-square and t tests were performed when appropriate to determine significance.

RESULTS

Of the 211 patients included in the study, 62 (29.4 percent) underwent oncoplastic breast reduction and 149 (70.6 percent) underwent breast reduction for benign macromastia. Mean age was significantly greater in the oncoplastic group (51.9 years versus 39.8 years; p = 0.00), as were the rate of diabetes (16.4 percent versus 6.1 percent; p = 0.02) and length of anesthesia (265 minutes versus 216 minutes; p = 0.00). Total resection weight was greater in the benign group (1623 g versus 1096 g; p = 0.00). There was a higher rate of loss of nipple sensation in the oncoplastic group (chi-square, 10.6; p = 0.005) but no differences in reoperation/readmission rate, revision surgery, hematoma, seroma, surgical-site infection, or fat necrosis. There was a significantly higher complication rate in the oncologic breast when compared to the symmetrizing breast within the oncoplastic cohort (19.4 percent versus 6.5 percent; p = 0.039), but no significant differences in the rates of individual complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the loss of nipple sensation was increased in patients undergoing oncoplastic breast reduction, all other outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups. The authors' findings indicate that oncoplastic breast reduction can be performed with a safety profile similar to that of a standard breast reduction.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Secondary Surgeries After Oncoplastic Reduction Mammoplasty

PURPOSE

The oncoplastic reduction approach is a popular option for women with breast cancer and macromastia. Although the benefits of this approach are numerous, data on the need for secondary surgeries are limited. We evaluated the need for all secondary surgeries after oncoplastic reduction in an attempt to understand the incidence and indications.

METHODS

All patients with breast cancer who underwent an oncoplastic breast reduction at the time of the tumor resection were queried from a prospectively maintained database from 1998 to 2020 (n = 547) at a single institution. Secondary surgical procedures were defined as any unplanned return to the operating room. Demographic and clinical variables were analyzed, and secondary surgeries were classified and evaluated. The timing and rates of secondary surgery were evaluated and compared with clinical variables.

RESULTS

There were 547 patients included in this series with a mean age of 55 years and body mass index of 33.5. Mean duration of follow-up was 3.8 years. One hundred and seventeen (21%) patients underwent 235 secondary surgeries, with an average of 1.4 operations until stable reconstruction was obtained. The reason for the secondary surgery was involved margins (7.5%), major complications (8.6%), aesthetic improvement (13.3%), and completion mastectomy (5.3%). Age 65 years and younger age was associated with any subsequent procedure (P = 0.023) and revision for cosmesis (P = 0.006). Patients with body mass index greater than 35 had increased secondary surgeries for operative complications (P = 0.026).

CONCLUSIONS

Secondary surgeries after oncoplastic breast reduction procedures are common. Management of margins and complications, such as hematoma and infection, are early indications, with aesthetic improvement, wound healing complications, fat necrosis, and recurrence being late reasons. The most common reason for reoperation is aesthetic improvement, especially in younger patients. Attention to surgical technique and patient selection will help minimize secondary surgeries for the nononcological reasons.

Implications of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery on Radiation Boost Delivery in Localized Breast Cancer

Background

Oncoplastic partial mastectomy (OPM) is a technique utilized to improve aesthetic and survivorship outcomes in patients with localized breast cancer. This technique leads to breast tissue rearrangement, which can have an impact on target definition for boost radiotherapy (BRT). The aim of this study was to determine if the choice of surgical technique independently affected the decision to deliver a radiation boost.

Materials and methods

This was a retrospective study of patients treated between January 2017 and December 2018. We selected consecutive patients based on surgical procedure: 50 undergoing standard breast-conserving surgery and 50 having had an OPM. The primary outcome was average treatment effect (ATE) of surgery type on reception of BRT. Secondary outcomes included ATE of surgery type on the time to reception of radiotherapy and incidence of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). The ratio of boost clinical target volume (CTV) to pathologic tumor size was also compared between the two groups. Treatment effects regression adjustment and inverse-probability weighted analysis was used to estimate ATEs for both primary and secondary outcomes.

Results

For the entire cohort, the median age was 64 years (range: 37-88 years). The median tumor size was 1.5 cm (range: 0.1-6.5 cm). The majority of patients were with ≤ stage IIA (78%), invasive ductal subtype (80%), negative lymphovascular space invasion (78%), negative margin (90%), and positive ER/PR (estrogen receptor/progesterone receptor) (69%). Overall, surgical technique was not associated with differences in the proportion of patients receiving BRT (ATE: 6.0% [95% CI: -4.5 to 16.0]). There were no differences in delays to radiation treatment between the two groups (ATE: 32.8 days [95% CI: -22.1 to 87.7]). With a median follow-up time of 419 days (range: 30-793 days), there were only five recurrences, with one case of IBTR in each group. There was no difference in the ratio of CTV volume to tumor size between the two groups (p=0.38).

Conclusions

OPM did not affect the decision to offer localized BRT following standard whole breast radiotherapy or significantly affect treatment times or radiation volumes. The decision to offer OPM should include a multi-disciplinary approach.

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.

Oncoplastic partial breast reconstruction: concepts and techniques

Immediate oncoplastic breast reconstruction performed at the time of breast conserving surgery for the treatment of breast cancer merges the therapeutic goals of complete oncologic extirpation with preservation of breast form and function. A constellation of surgical techniques that employs breast volume displacement and/or replacement methods of varying complexity levels have emerged, thus broadening the potential applications for breast conservation therapy to include cases with increased tumor-to-native breast-volume ratios, multicentric or multifocal disease, and/or previous margin-positive resections. This review describes the various reconstructive methods, including the use of local tissue rearrangement, oncoplastic reduction-mastopexy, and locoregional flaps. Classification of the surgical options into levels I and II volume-displacement and volume-replacing techniques is made. Additionally, we explore the oncologic safety and effectiveness of this treatment paradigm by summarizing existing supportive evidence regarding associated risk of surgical complications, rate of margin-positive resection, implications for radiographic surveillance, local recurrence rates, and patient-reported outcomes. In conclusion, surgeons may use a wide variety of oncoplastic techniques for partial breast reconstruction at the time of segmental mastectomy to deliver effective breast conserving treatment for women with breast cancer. A growing body of literature affirms the oncologic safety of this approach. Future directions for research include long-term follow-up data with emphasis on outcomes from patient perspectives.

The Role of Oncoplastic Surgery for Breast Cancer

OPINION STATEMENT

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) expands the indications and possibilities of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) by allowing for a wider cancer resection than lumpectomy. Ongoing investigation and reporting of OPS outcomes along with improvements in comprehensive training in breast surgical oncology will impact on awareness and lead to increased adoption of these techniques. Indications for OPS include concern about clear margins, poor tumor location (upper inner pole and lower quadrant), multifocality, need for skin excision, and poor candidacy for mastectomy and reconstruction. OPS has been proven to be oncological safe with comparable rates of complications, positive margins, and re-excisions with BCS. Additionally, OPS has a positive impact on the quality of life and self-esteem when compared with those patients that underwent BCT.

A New Therapeutic Application of Platelet-Rich Plasma to Chronic Breast Wounds: A Prospective Observational Study

The aim of this study was to investigate the usefulness of platelet-rich plasma (PRP) treatment for chronic wounds (CWs) of the breast. A prospective study was performed in 23 patients with CW of the breast who were treated with PRP. The procedure was repeated until the wound was closed completely. The study included patients with a history of breast cancer (n = 8) and patients without cancer (n = 15). The treatment with PRP was successful in all cases and observed in ≤4 weeks in 82.6% (19/23) of patients. The patients without breast cancer showed significantly less time for wound closure than the patients with a history of breast cancer. Moreover, a greater number of PRP treatments were necessary to achieve wound closure in patients undergoing conservative breast treatment. No patients had complications associated with the application of PRP. Conclusions: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to reveal that PRP treatment for CWs of the breast is safe, simple, useful and well-tolerated by patients.

Immediate Contralateral Mastopexy/Breast Reduction for Symmetry Can Be Performed Safely in Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery expands the indications for breast conservation. When performed using modified mastopexy/breast reduction techniques, the optimal timing of the contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy/breast reduction remains unclear. This study examined the effect of the timing of symmetrizing mastopexy/breast reduction on oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery outcomes.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of all patients who underwent oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery using mastopexy/breast reduction techniques at a single center from 2010 to 2016. Patients who received synchronous (immediate) contralateral breast symmetrizing mastopexy were compared with those who underwent a delayed symmetrizing mastopexy procedure. Demographic, treatment, and outcome data were collected. Descriptive statistics were used and multivariate analysis was performed to evaluate the various relationships.

RESULTS

There were 429 patients (713 breasts) included in the study; of these, 284 patients (568 breasts) underwent oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery involving mastopexy/breast reduction techniques and immediate symmetrizing mastopexy, and 145 patients underwent delayed contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy. The overall complication rate was similar between the immediate and delayed groups (25.4 percent versus 26.9 percent, respectively; p = 0.82), as was the major complication rate (10.6 percent versus 6.2 percent; p = 0.16). Complications resulted in a delay in adjuvant therapy in 18 patients (4.2 percent); in two patients (0.7 percent), this delay resulted from a complication in the contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy breast. Immediate contralateral symmetrizing mastopexy was not associated with increased risk of complications per breast (p = 0.82) or delay to adjuvant therapy (p = 0.6).

CONCLUSION

Contralateral mastopexy/breast reduction for symmetry can be performed at the time of oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery in carefully selected patients without significantly increasing the risk of complications or delay to adjuvant radiation therapy.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction in the Time of the Novel Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Pandemic

Background:

Breast reconstruction has a well-documented positive impact on the psychosocial well-being of women recovering from breast cancer. Rates of breast cancer diagnoses are rising, and more women are seeking mastectomy as treatment and as prophylaxis.

Methods:

Postmastectomy breast reconstruction often begins at the time of mastectomy in coordination with the oncologic breast surgeons. Immediate breast reconstruction increases complication rate (11% vs 4%) and unplanned reoperation rate (7% vs 4%), requiring more personnel and resources used during the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of patient care.

Discussion:

In the setting of global pandemics such as coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), breast reconstruction demands a unique and nuanced approach, as most forms of breast reconstruction can occur successfully in a delayed fashion. While this may prolong the overall time until completion of reconstruction, other factors come into play in the setting of a communicable (potentially deadly) illness. Factors that must be considered include allocation of essential resources and protection of patients and families from disease transmission.

Conclusions:

Plastic surgeons performing breast reconstruction must take these factors into account when counseling their patients, colleagues, and institutions and be proactive in determining which procedures are time-critical and which should be postponed until the disaster situation has relieved.