1
|
Turgeon MK, Willcox LM, Styblo TM, Losken A. Impact of Oncoplastic Surgery on Oncologic Outcomes in Patients with Breast Cancer. PLASTIC AND RECONSTRUCTIVE SURGERY-GLOBAL OPEN 2024; 12:e5561. [PMID: 38292812 PMCID: PMC10827286 DOI: 10.1097/gox.0000000000005561] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/07/2023] [Accepted: 11/27/2023] [Indexed: 02/01/2024]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | - Toncred M. Styblo
- Winship Cancer Institute, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Ga
| | - Albert Losken
- Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, Ga
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Armstrong K, Maxwell J. Oncoplastic surgery for breast cancer: Global perspectives and trends. J Surg Oncol 2023; 128:967-971. [PMID: 37818917 DOI: 10.1002/jso.27408] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/16/2023] [Accepted: 07/16/2023] [Indexed: 10/13/2023]
Abstract
Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) is a form of breast conservation that combines definitive oncologic resection with optimal aesthetic outcomes. Various definitions exist, with most focusing on volume displacement techniques to close the lumpectomy defect and redistribute the remaining breast volume over the preserved breast. Although its oncologic safety has been well demonstrated, uptake into practice varies globally. This article details the definition, safety, training opportunities, and practice patterns of OPS on a global scale.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kate Armstrong
- Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
| | - Jessica Maxwell
- Department of Surgery, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Simsek Turan EH, Uslu A, Turan MI, Vardar Gok O, Parlak AE, Akgul N. The effects of breast reduction with superomedial and inferior pedicle techniques on radiological breast imaging. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg 2023; 86:79-87. [PMID: 37716253 DOI: 10.1016/j.bjps.2023.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/07/2023] [Revised: 07/26/2023] [Accepted: 08/13/2023] [Indexed: 09/18/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several breast reduction techniques have been introduced, and the reliability of these techniques has been demonstrated in clinical practice. However, it is still controversial how patients should be evaluated radiologically both preoperative and postoperative. This study aims to compare the radiological findings seen following reduction mammoplasty with two different techniques (inferior pedicle and superomedial pedicle), in connection with the surgical steps. METHODS Medical records of 141 patients and a total of 278 breasts who underwent breast reduction with the diagnosis of macromastia were retrospectively analyzed. Demographic and operative data such as age, type of pedicle, preoperative and postoperative nipple-areola complex (NAC) position, and NAC transfer distance were recorded. Radiological evaluation was performed by two radiologists experienced in breast imaging by reinterpreting preoperative and postoperative mammography images. RESULTS The rate of postoperative structural distortion (p < 0.001), thickened areola (p = 0.011), and retroareolar fibrotic band (p < 0.001) were observed to be significantly higher in the superomedial group. The risk of fat necrosis increases as the NAC transfer distance increases and a value of >9.5 cm in the NAC transfer distance can be considered as the cutoff value in terms of fat necrosis development, especially in those using superomedial pedicle technique. CONCLUSION Surgical technique-specific benign radiological changes occur following reduction mammoplasty. However, these changes do not significantly affect the Breast imaging, reporting, and data system category. The localization of fat necrosis differs depending on the surgical technique, and the risk of fat necrosis increases as the NAC transfer distance increases, especially in those who have undergone superomedial pedicle breast reduction surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emine Handan Simsek Turan
- University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Antalya, Turkey.
| | - Asım Uslu
- University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Antalya, Turkey
| | | | - Ozlem Vardar Gok
- University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiology, Antalya, Turkey
| | - Ayse Eda Parlak
- University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Department of Radiology, Antalya, Turkey
| | - Nedim Akgul
- University of Health Sciences, Antalya Training and Research Hospital, Department of General Surgery, Antalya, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Drohan AE, Quan ML, Birdsell DC, Xu Y. Breast Cancer After Reduction Mammoplasty: A Population-Based Analysis of Incidence, Treatment and Screening Patterns. ANNALS OF SURGERY OPEN 2023; 4:e322. [PMID: 37746628 PMCID: PMC10513359 DOI: 10.1097/as9.0000000000000322] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/24/2023] [Accepted: 07/14/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023] Open
Abstract
Background The risk of breast cancer may be decreased in women who undergo reduction mammoplasty. The purpose of this study was to describe the incidence and treatment of breast cancer after reduction mammoplasty and to better understand the use of breast cancer screening modalities in these patients. Methods This population-based retrospective analysis utilized the Discharge Abstract Database held by the Canadian Institute for Health Information and the National Ambulatory Care Reporting System to identify all women aged 20 years or older who underwent reduction mammoplasty in Alberta, Canada. The incidence and treatment of breast cancer were compared among patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty and age-sex-matched controls. Imaging utilization, including the use of mammography, ultrasound, and breast biopsy, was also compared. Results Between 2003 and 2007, 8021 patients over 20 years old underwent reduction mammoplasty in Alberta. Patients were followed for an average of 12.6 years. Eighty-nine (1.1%) patients who underwent reduction mammoplasty developed breast cancer after surgery, compared to 453 (1.9%) controls (P < 0.0001). Among patients diagnosed with breast cancer, there was no difference in patient and tumor characteristics. Women who underwent reduction mammoplasty were more likely to undergo mastectomy for cancer (41.6% vs 1.5%; P < 0.0001) and were more likely to undergo mammography (66.7% vs 58.7%; P < 0.0001), ultrasound (29.2% vs 26.2%; P < 0.0001) and biopsy for benign disease (7.2% vs 6%, P < 0.0001) compared to controls. Conclusions Despite an increased frequency of breast cancer screening, the incidence of breast cancer is lower after reduction mammoplasty compared with women who did not undergo breast reduction. After a diagnosis of breast cancer, surgical treatment patterns differ between groups, whereby mastectomy is more common after reduction mammoplasty.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ashley E Drohan
- From the Department of Surgery, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada
| | - May Lynn Quan
- Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Dale C Birdsell
- Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| | - Yuan Xu
- Department of Oncology, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Community Health Sciences, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
- Department of Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Mohamedahmed AYY, Zaman S, Zafar S, Laroiya I, Iqbal J, Tan MLH, Shetty G. Comparison of surgical and oncological outcomes between oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery versus conventional breast-conserving surgery for treatment of breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 31 studies. Surg Oncol 2022; 42:101779. [DOI: 10.1016/j.suronc.2022.101779] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/28/2022] [Revised: 04/01/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2022] [Indexed: 10/18/2022]
|
6
|
Metz G, Snook K, Sood S, Baron-Hay S, Spillane A, Lamoury G, Carroll S. Breast Radiotherapy after Oncoplastic Surgery-A Multidisciplinary Approach. Cancers (Basel) 2022; 14:1685. [PMID: 35406457 PMCID: PMC8996843 DOI: 10.3390/cancers14071685] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/10/2022] [Revised: 03/02/2022] [Accepted: 03/21/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Oncoplastic breast surgery encompasses a range of techniques used to provide equitable oncological outcomes compared with standard breast surgery while, simultaneously, prioritizing aesthetic outcomes. While the outcomes of oncoplastic breast surgery are promising, it can add an extra complexity to the treatment paradigm of breast cancer and impact on decision-making surrounding adjuvant therapies, like chemotherapy and radiotherapy. As such, early discussions at the multidisciplinary team meeting with surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists present, should be encouraged to facilitate best patient care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabrielle Metz
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia; (S.S.); (S.B.-H.); (G.L.); (S.C.)
| | - Kylie Snook
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; (K.S.); (A.S.)
- Breast and Surgical Oncology, The Poche Centre, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
- The Mater Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
| | - Samriti Sood
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia; (S.S.); (S.B.-H.); (G.L.); (S.C.)
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; (K.S.); (A.S.)
- Breast and Surgical Oncology, The Poche Centre, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
- The Mater Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
- Breast and Melanoma Surgery Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia
| | - Sally Baron-Hay
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia; (S.S.); (S.B.-H.); (G.L.); (S.C.)
| | - Andrew Spillane
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; (K.S.); (A.S.)
- Breast and Surgical Oncology, The Poche Centre, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
- The Mater Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
- Breast and Melanoma Surgery Unit, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia
| | - Gillian Lamoury
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia; (S.S.); (S.B.-H.); (G.L.); (S.C.)
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; (K.S.); (A.S.)
- The Mater Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
| | - Susan Carroll
- Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2065, Australia; (S.S.); (S.B.-H.); (G.L.); (S.C.)
- Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW 2006, Australia; (K.S.); (A.S.)
- The Mater Hospital, Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Karadeniz Cakmak G. Innovative Standards in Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery: From Radical Mastectomy to Extreme Oncoplasty. Breast Care (Basel) 2022; 16:559-573. [PMID: 35087359 DOI: 10.1159/000518992] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/27/2021] [Accepted: 08/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/11/2022] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
8
|
Nanda A, Hu J, Hodgkinson S, Ali S, Rainsbury R, Roy PG. Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for women with primary breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2021; 10:CD013658. [PMID: 34713449 PMCID: PMC8554646 DOI: 10.1002/14651858.cd013658.pub2] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/27/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Akriti Nanda
- Department of Breast Surgery, Oxford University Hospitals, Oxford, UK
| | - Jesse Hu
- Division of Breast Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore, Singapore
| | - Sarah Hodgkinson
- Editorial & Methods Department, Cochrane Central Executive, London, UK
| | - Sanah Ali
- Medical School, Oxford University, Oxford, UK
| | | | - Pankaj G Roy
- Nuffield Department of Surgical Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
10
|
Should oncoplastic breast conserving surgery be used for the treatment of early stage breast cancer? Using the GRADE approach for development of clinical recommendations. Breast 2021; 57:25-35. [PMID: 33711697 PMCID: PMC7970134 DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.02.013] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/21/2021] [Accepted: 02/21/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Introduction The potential advantages of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery (BCS) have not been validated in robust studies that constitute high levels of evidence, despite oncoplastic techniques being widely adopted around the globe. There is hence the need to define the precise role of oncoplastic BCS in the treatment of early breast cancer, with consensual recommendations for clinical practice. Methods A panel of world-renowned breast specialists was convened to evaluate evidence, express personal viewpoints and establish recommendations for the use of oncoplastic BCS as primary treatment of unifocal early stage breast cancers using the GRADE approach. Results According to the results of the systematic review of literature, the panelists were asked to comment on the recommendation for use of oncoplastic BCS for treatment of operable breast cancer that is suitable for breast conserving surgery, with the GRADE approach. Based on the voting outcome, the following recommendation emerged as a consensus statement: Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery should be recommended versus standard breast conserving surgery for the treatment of operable breast cancer in adult women who are suitable candidates for breast conserving surgery (with very low certainty of evidence). Discussion This review has revealed a low level of evidence for most of the important outcomes in oncoplastic surgery with lack of any randomized data and absence of standard tools for evaluation of clinical outcomes and especially patients’ values. Despite areas of controversy, about one-third (36%) of panel members expressed a strong recommendation in support of oncoplastic BCS. Presumably, this reflects a synthesis of views on the relative complexity of these techniques, associated complications, impact on quality of life and costs.
Collapse
|
11
|
Natural course of fat necrosis after breast reconstruction: a 10-year follow-up study. BMC Cancer 2021; 21:166. [PMID: 33593330 PMCID: PMC7885495 DOI: 10.1186/s12885-021-07881-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/21/2020] [Accepted: 02/04/2021] [Indexed: 11/10/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although fat necrosis is a minor postoperative complication after breast reconstruction, occasionally it mimics to tumor recurrence in patients with breast cancer. Therefore, the surgeon should distinguish between benign fat necrosis and true local recurrence. The authors evaluated the clinical characteristics of fat necrosis after breast reconstruction and investigated the natural course of fat necrosis. Methods Between 2007 and 2013, a total of 362 patients underwent breast reconstruction after partial or total mastectomy for breast cancer in Kyungpook National University Hospital. Clinicopathologic characteristics and the occurrence of fat necrosis were assessed during surveillance for 10 years of mean follow-up period. Results There were 42 cases (11.6%) of fat necrosis after breast reconstruction with partial or total mastectomy which were confirmed by needle or excision biopsy. The fat necrosis was resolved after a mean period of 45.9 months (SD, ± 42.1) and 26 cases (61.9%) of fat necrosis were almost completely resolved (less than 5 mm) during 10-year follow-up period. Conclusion Based on the natural course of fat necrosis, the fat necrosis after breast reconstruction can be only monitored, if pathologic confirmation was done. More than half of the cases will be resolved within 2–3 years. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-021-07881-x.
Collapse
|
12
|
Safety and Outcomes of Oncoplastic Breast Surgery. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2021. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-020-00398-5] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/22/2022]
|
13
|
Chu CK, Hanson SE, Hwang RF, Wu LC. Oncoplastic partial breast reconstruction: concepts and techniques. Gland Surg 2021; 10:398-410. [PMID: 33633998 DOI: 10.21037/gs-20-380] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/04/2023]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Carrie K Chu
- Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Summer E Hanson
- Department of Plastic Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Rosa F Hwang
- Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, Division of Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Liza C Wu
- Section of Plast Reconstr Surg, Department of Surgery, The University of Pennsylvania Health System, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Abstract
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.
Collapse
|
15
|
Shaitelman SF, Jeruss JS, Pusic AL. Oncoplastic Surgery in the Management of Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2020; 38:2246-2253. [PMID: 32442070 DOI: 10.1200/jco.19.02795] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Affiliation(s)
- Simona F Shaitelman
- Department of Radiation Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX
| | | | - Andrea L Pusic
- Division of Plastic Surgery, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA
| |
Collapse
|
16
|
Kosasih S, Tayeh S, Mokbel K, Kasem A. Is oncoplastic breast conserving surgery oncologically safe? A meta-analysis of 18,103 patients. Am J Surg 2020; 220:385-392. [PMID: 31926592 DOI: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2019.12.019] [Citation(s) in RCA: 32] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2019] [Revised: 11/10/2019] [Accepted: 12/13/2019] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery (OBCS) allows adequate resection margins of tumours unsuitable for standard breast conserving surgery (SBCS) whilst allowing for better cosmesis and reduced morbidity when compared to mastectomy. However, there is limited evidence on its oncological safety. METHODS This study aims to compare oncological safety of OBCS with SBCS and mastectomy by examining the relative risk of cancer recurrence and re-operation rates through meta-analysis. RESULTS 18 studies met the search criteria including 18,103 patients. The primary outcome measure (recurrence) was not significantly different between OBCS and SBCS or mastectomy (RR 0.861; 95% CI 0.640-1.160; p = 0.296). The secondary outcome measure (re-operation) initially achieved significance in favour of OBCS (RR 0.64; 95% CI 0.46-0.89; p = 0.01). However, after adjustment for publication bias this was attenuated to insignificance between the two study groups (RR 0.86; 95% CI 0.56-1.31; p = 0.44). CONCLUSIONS For both cancer recurrence and re-operation rate, there was no significant difference between OBCS and traditional techniques. OBCS is of comparable oncological safety to more established surgical procedures and a useful option in suitable patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Salim Tayeh
- Homerton University Hospital Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Kefah Mokbel
- The London Breast Institute, The Princess Grace Hospital, London, UK
| | - Abdul Kasem
- King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
| |
Collapse
|
17
|
Fan KL, Yang S, Park S, Park TH, Song SY, Lee N, Lew DH, Kim MJ, Lee DW. Postoperative Cancer Surveillance Following Oncoplastic Surgery with Latissimus Dorsi Flap: a Matched Case-Control Study. Ann Surg Oncol 2019; 26:4681-4691. [PMID: 31605343 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-019-07898-4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/01/2019] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND The latissimus dorsi (LD) myocutaneous flap is a widely used local option in oncoplastic surgery for avoiding breast deformities; however, concerns exist regarding its influence in monitoring recurrence. In this study, we evaluated the impact of this flap on postoperative cancer surveillance. METHODS Each patient receiving oncoplastic surgery with LD flap after partial mastectomy were matched in age, cancer stage, and body mass index with patients receiving partial mastectomy alone. Twenty-nine patients with the oncoplastic LD flap received 99 mammograms and 139 ultrasonograms, while 29 patients with partial mastectomy alone underwent 92 mammograms and 129 ultrasonograms. Mammographic and ultrasonographic findings were classified by Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category and reviewed. Any recommendations for additional evaluation and recurrence were documented. RESULTS During an average follow-up period of 44 months, although the oncoplastic group demonstrated more newly developed benign calcifications (control 14% vs. oncoplastic 41%; p = 0.019) on mammography, the percentage of recall for additional imaging in category 0, and the short-interval follow-up in category 3, was not different between the control and oncoplastic group. Regarding ultrasonography, BI-RADS category was also not different between the two groups; however, the control group showed more fluid collections than the oncoplastic group (control 21% vs. oncoplastic 0%; p = 0.023). One case of local recurrence was observed in the control group. CONCLUSION Although there was an increase in benign calcifications in the oncoplastic group, there were no additional abnormal findings requiring further intervention. We concluded that the LD flap for oncoplastic surgery does not interfere with cancer surveillance, and even decreases the rate of fluid collection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kenneth L Fan
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, MedStar Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, DC, USA
| | - Simon Yang
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Seho Park
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.,Division of Public Health Sciences, Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA
| | - Tae Hwan Park
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, CHA Bundang Medical Center, CHA University, Seongnam, Korea
| | - Seung Yong Song
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Nara Lee
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Dae Hyun Lew
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea
| | - Min Jung Kim
- Department of Radiology, Research Institute of Radiologic Science, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
| | - Dong Won Lee
- Department of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, and Institute for Human Tissue Restoration, Yonsei University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
18
|
Hu J, Cuffolo G, Parulekar V, Chan V, Tenovici A, Roy PG. The Results of Surveillance Imaging After Breast Conservation Surgery and Partial Breast Reconstruction With Chest Wall Perforator Flaps; A Qualitative Analysis Compared With Standard Breast-Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer. Clin Breast Cancer 2019; 19:e422-e427. [DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2019.01.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/05/2018] [Revised: 01/17/2019] [Accepted: 01/20/2019] [Indexed: 10/27/2022]
|
19
|
Amitai Y, Golan O, Barnea Y, Klausner J, Menes TS. Follow-up of patients undergoing oncoplastic surgery - more palpable masses and benign biopsies. Breast Dis 2018; 37:115-121. [PMID: 28984579 DOI: 10.3233/bd-170284] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Oncoplastic reconstruction is increasingly used in the management of women undergoing breast conserving surgery. We examined the findings on breast exam and imaging of patients who underwent breast conservation with or without oncoplastic reconstruction. OBJECTIVE We hypothesized that patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction would present with more palpable and imaging abnormalities compared to lumpectomy alone and undergo therefore more biopsies. METHODS All patients undergoing breast conservation with oncoplastic reconstruction for breast cancer between 2009 and 2014 were included in the study group. The control group was created by matching 4 women that underwent lumpectomy alone during the same week to each patient in the study group. The two groups were compared regarding demographics, tumor characteristics, post-operative complaints, breast exam, imaging and biopsies done during follow-up. RESULTS The study group included 67 women who had lumpectomy and immediate oncoplastic reconstruction and 268 women that underwent lumpectomy alone.Patients undergoing immediate oncoplastic reconstruction had more advanced disease; larger mean tumor size (3.1 cm versus 1.9 cm, P < 0.001), higher rate of involved lymph nodes (48% versus 26%; P < 0.001) and use of neoadjuvant treatment (39% versus 15%; P < 0.001).After oncoplastic reconstruction, new lumps (18% versus 5%; P = 0.004) were found more frequently, and there was a higher rate of women undergoing biopsies (31% versus 11%; P < 0.001). This finding remained significant after controlling for age, type of tumor, use of neoadjuvant treatment and volume of tissue removed. Over ninety percent of biopsies in the oncoplastic group were benign, most commonly-fat necrosis (N = 15, 60% of the biopsies). CONCLUSIONS Immediate oncoplastic reconstruction is associated with increased palpable masses and imaging abnormalities, requiring biopsies. Patients and clinicians should be aware of the benign nature of most of these findings.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Yoav Amitai
- Departments of Radiology, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Orit Golan
- Departments of Radiology, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Yoav Barnea
- Departments of Plastic Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Joseph Klausner
- Departments of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | - Tehillah S Menes
- Departments of Surgery, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel.,Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| |
Collapse
|
20
|
Patient-Reported Outcomes following Breast Conservation Therapy and Barriers to Referral for Partial Breast Reconstruction. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141:1-9. [DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000003914] [Citation(s) in RCA: 19] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
21
|
The Expanded Use of Autoaugmentation Techniques in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg 2018; 141:10-19. [DOI: 10.1097/prs.0000000000004009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/25/2022]
|
22
|
Abstract
The oncoplastic approach to breast conservation therapy has become a useful and popular option for women with breast cancer who wish to preserve their breast. The initial driving forces were aimed at minimizing the potential for a breast conservation therapy deformity; however, various other benefits have been identified that include broadening the indications for breast conservation therapy in some patients and improved margin control. The various techniques can be categorized into glandular rearrangement techniques such as breast reductions usually in patients with larger breasts or flap reconstruction such as the latissimus dorsi muscle usually in patients with smaller breasts. As the acceptance continues to increase, we are starting to see more outcomes evidence in terms of patient satisfaction, quality of life, complications, and recurrence, to further support the safety and efficacy of the oncoplastic approach.
Collapse
|
23
|
|
24
|
De La Cruz L, Blankenship SA, Chatterjee A, Geha R, Nocera N, Czerniecki BJ, Tchou J, Fisher CS. Outcomes After Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Literature Review. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23:3247-58. [DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5313-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 159] [Impact Index Per Article: 19.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2016] [Indexed: 11/18/2022]
|
25
|
Piper ML, Sbitany H. The Optimal Approach to Post-Mastectomy and Post-Lumpectomy Breast Reconstruction. CURRENT BREAST CANCER REPORTS 2016. [DOI: 10.1007/s12609-016-0210-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/21/2022]
|