Immediate Prepectoral Tissue Expander Breast Reconstruction Without Acellular Dermal Matrix Is Equally Safe Following Skin-Sparing and Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Prepectoral breast reconstruction has become increasingly popular over the last decade. There is a paucity of data surrounding the impact of mastectomy type on clinical outcomes when comparing prepectoral immediate breast reconstruction without acellular dermal matrix (ADM) using tissue expansion. The purpose of this study was to compare 90-day reconstructive surgical outcomes in immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction between patients with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM).

METHODS

A retrospective review of patient records was carried out on all patients undergoing NSM or SSM with immediate prepectoral tissue expander reconstruction without ADM, in a single institution, from June 2020 to December 2021. All complications were recorded, categorized, and statistically analyzed for significance.

RESULTS

Seventy-nine patients (97 breasts) were studied. The mean age was 51 years old (range, 31-77). Twenty-two patients suffered complications recorded in 22 breasts (22.7%). There was no statistically significant difference in the total complications between the NSM (25.7%) and SSM (21.0%) groups or in the incidence of all major and minor complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Breast reconstruction using tissue expanders without ADM has similar reconstructive outcomes in both NSM and SSM. There were no significant differences in complication rates between either groups. Breast reconstruction without ADM can confer institutional cost savings without compromising safety.

Invasive Cancer Confined to the Nipple of the Conserved Breast: A Case Report

Invasive breast cancer deriving from the milk duct and lobule that develops in the nipple is extremely rare, except in Paget's disease and skin cancer. This is the second reported case of the development of invasive cancer confined to the nipple after breast-conserving surgery. A 69-year-old woman visited our department due to redness, swelling, and bloody discharge of the right nipple in the last month. A needle biopsy was suggestive of invasive ductal carcinoma; we performed a removal surgery of the right residual breast tissue and a second sentinel lymph node biopsy. She underwent these procedures 10 years previously as well. Thus, we diagnosed the present lesion as a local recurrence, but it was unknown whether the lesion was a true recurrence or second cancer, namely, metachronal ipsilateral breast cancer. The present case helps promote awareness that invasive cancer rarely develops in the nipple after conserving surgery. Patients should be encouraged to visit a medical facility if experiencing skin changes and swelling of the nipple. Additionally, breast cancer patients must be carefully selected for breast-conserving surgery; failure to do so may later result in nipple-specific local recurrence.

Evaluation of Local Oncologic Safety in Nipple-Areola Complex-sparing Mastectomy After Primary Chemotherapy: A Propensity Score-matched Study

BACKGROUND

Nipple-areola complex-sparing mastectomy (NSM), extending the concept of skin-sparing mastectomy, allows for the provision of a better cosmetic result. Large operable T2-T3 breast cancer might theoretically appear suitable for this surgical option as an alternative to conventional mastectomy or breast-conserving surgery, when a good response to primary chemotherapy has been achieved.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2009 to May 2013, 422 patients with invasive breast cancer were progressively accrued to NSM. Of the 422 patients, 361 underwent NSM as first-line treatment (NSM group), and 61 underwent surgery after primary chemotherapy (NSM-PC group). A total of 151 breast cancer patients, who had undergone PC and conventional total mastectomy (TM-PC group) from 2004 to 2009 were evaluated as comparative group with respect to the NSM-PC group. Using propensity score matching, local disease-free survival (LDFS) was evaluated comparatively.

RESULTS

The rate of nipple-areola involvement in the NSM and NSM-PC groups was 13.3% and 9.8%, respectively (P = .539). The nipple-areola involvement in the NSM and NSM-PC groups was significantly associated with the tumor size (odds ratio [OR], 1.48; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-1.95; P = .004), plurifocal or pluricentric tumor (OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.72-5.89; P < .001), and the presence of an intraductal component (OR, 2.38; 95% CI, 1.22-4.64; P = .011). The LDFS in the NSM-PC and TM-PC matched cohorts did not show a significant difference, with a 4-year LDFS of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.77-0.95) and 0.93 (95% CI, 0.83-0.97), respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 0.40-4.35; P = .655). The NSM-PC cohort was also compared with the NSM cohort in terms of LDFS using 2 different matching criteria, with the tumor size before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy as the balancing covariate. In the first of the 2 comparisons, the hazards of local relapse were comparable between the 2 matched groups (HR, 1.23; 95% CI, 0.37-4.04; P = .739). In the second comparison, the NSM-PC patients showed a significant greater hazard of local relapse than did the NSM patients (HR, 3.60; 95% CI, 1.10-11.80; P = .035).

CONCLUSION

NSM might be a valuable option for large breast cancer treated by primary chemotherapy. The rate of local relapse seemed to be related to the disease stage, and no significant association with the type of surgery was detected.

The Genetics of Breast Cancer: What the Surgical Oncologist Needs to Know

This article summarizes the impact of germline predisposition to breast cancer on the surgical management of breast cancer and breast cancer risk. Surgical implications of germline predisposition to breast cancer are now more nuanced due to the application of increasingly more complicated next-generation sequencing-based tests. The rapid pace of change will continue to challenge paradigms for genetic cancer risk assessment, which can influence the medical and surgical management of breast cancer risk as well as strategies for screening and for risk reduction.

Screening-detected non-symptomatic breast cancer: a case history

Alice is a 65 year-old woman who was recalled for further investigations following a routine screening mammogram, which showed a 25 mm mass in her left breast. This case history will report on the further investigations and surgery required to manage this infiltrating ductal carcinoma. The histopathology report will be analysed to provide a rationale for future treatment with radiotherapy, and Alice's expected prognosis will be presented using the Nottingham Prognostic Index. Alice's psychological support needs will identified and the appropriate interventions will be discussed with a particular focus on Alice's history of depression. The supportive and educational role of the breast care nurse and the multidisciplinary team will be highlighted throughout the study.

Nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer and risk-reducing surgery: the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center experience

BACKGROUND

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been gathering increased recognition as an alternative to more traditional mastectomy approaches. Initially, questions concerning its oncologic safety limited the use of NSM. Nevertheless, mounting evidence supporting the practice of NSM for both prophylactic and oncologic purposes is leading to its more widespread use and broadened indications.

METHODS

Using a prospectively maintained database, we reviewed our experience of 353 NSM procedures performed in 200 patients over the past 10 years.

RESULTS

The indications for surgery were: 196 prophylactic risk-reduction (55.5%), 74 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (20.8%), 82 invasive cancer (23.2%), and 1 phyllodes tumor (0.5%). The nipple areolar complex (NAC) was entirely preserved in 341 mastectomies (96.7%). There were 11 patients (3.1%) who were found to have cancer at the nipple margin, warranting further excision. A total of 69 breasts (19.5%) had some degree of skin desquamation or necrosis, but only 12 (3.3%) required operative debridement, of which 3 breasts (1%) necessitated removal of a breast implant. Also, 6 patients (2%) were treated for infection. Of the 196 prophylactic NSMs, 11 specimens (5.6%) were found to harbor occult cancer (8 DCIS and 3 invasive cancers). One patient who underwent NSM for invasive ductal carcinoma in 2006 developed metastatic disease to her brain. No other recurrences are attributable to the 353 NSMs.

CONCLUSIONS

The trends demonstrate the increasing acceptance of NSM as a prophylactic procedure as well as for therapeutic purposes. Although NSM is not standard, our experience supports the selective use of NSM in both prophylactic and malignant settings.

Nipple discharge after nipple-sparing mastectomy: should the areola complex always be removed?

Nipple discharge (ND) is a common symptom with a reported incidence of 2% to 5% of patients referred to breast cancer clinics. Approximately 90% of ND is of benign etiology. An underlying carcinoma is present with a rate of 6% to 21%. This is more frequent if it is associated with clinical or radiologic abnormality. ND after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is a rare event as the whole retroareolar glandular tissue is usually completely removed with mastectomy. ND is otherwise possible if a small amount of tissue is accidentally left by the surgeon or with the aim of reducing the risk of the nipple-areola complex (NAC) necrosis. This condition can be of concern as it may imply a local recurrence and therefore implicate NAC removal. Herein we report a case of a ND in an NSM in which only a selective duct excision allowed NAC preservation.

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN): open controversies and guidelines of the Istituto Europeo di Oncologia (IEO), Milan, Italy

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN) has substantially changed over the past 30 years, as its incidence has increased (from 2-3% to more than 20%), mainly due to the widespread use of mammography screening. This article describes not only the more widespread theoretical concepts on DIN but also the differences in the practical applications of the theory between different countries, different oncology specialists, and different cancer centers. Papers related to the international multicentre-randomized trials and retrospective studies were analyzed. We include articles and papers published between 1993 and 2010 related to patients with DIN, and abstracts and reports from MEDLINE and other sources were indentified. The standard of care for DIN consists of (a) breast conservative surgery (mastectomy is still indicated in large lesions--masses or microcalcifications--in about 30% of cases); (b) radiotherapy (RT) after conservative surgery, and (c) medical treatment in estrogen receptors-positive patients. However, most studies have shown significant differences between theory and practical application. Moreover, there are differences regarding (a) the indications of sentinel lymph node biopsy, (b) the definition and identification of low-risk DIN subgroups that can avoid RT and tamoxifen, and (c) the research into new alternative drugs in adjuvant medical therapy. A general agreement on the best management of DIN does not exist as yet. New large trials are needed in order to define the best management of DIN patients which is (in most respects) still complex and controversial.