-
Current Oncology (Toronto, Ont.) Apr 2024Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS), characterized by persistent pain lasting at least three months following mastectomy, affects 20-50% of breast surgery patients,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS), characterized by persistent pain lasting at least three months following mastectomy, affects 20-50% of breast surgery patients, lacking effective treatment options. A review was conducted utilizing EMBASE, MEDLINE, and all evidence-based medicine reviews to evaluate the effect of fat grafting as a treatment option for PMPS from database inception to 29 April 2023 (PROSPERO ID: CRD42023422627). Nine studies and 812 patients in total were included in the review. The overall mean change in visual analog scale (VAS) was -3.6 in 285 patients following fat grafting and 0.5 in 147 control group patients. There was a significant reduction in VAS from baseline in the fat grafting group compared to the control group, = 395, mean difference = -2.17 (95% CI, -2.95 to -1.39). This significant improvement was also noted in patients who underwent mastectomy without reconstruction. Common complications related to fat grafting include capsular contracture, seroma, hematoma, and infection. Surgeons should consider fat grafting as a treatment option for PMPS. However, future research is needed to substantiate this evidence and to identify timing, volume of fat grafting, and which patient cohort will benefit the most.
Topics: Female; Humans; Adipose Tissue; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Pain, Postoperative; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 38668055
DOI: 10.3390/curroncol31040152 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jan 2024Breast reconstruction (BR) is routinely offered to restore symmetry after mastectomy for breast cancer. Not all women, however, may want reconstructive surgery. A... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Breast reconstruction (BR) is routinely offered to restore symmetry after mastectomy for breast cancer. Not all women, however, may want reconstructive surgery. A contralateral mastectomy (CM) to achieve "flat symmetry" can be an excellent alternative, but surgeons are often reluctant to offer this procedure. This systematic review aimed to summarize the available evidence regarding the outcomes of CM as the first step to developing guidelines in this area.
METHODS
PubMed, MEDLINE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched to identify primary research studies, published in English between 1 January 2000 and 30 August 2022, evaluating clinical or patient-reported outcomes for women who underwent a CM without reconstruction after a mastectomy for unilateral breast cancer. Simple descriptive statistics summarized quantitative data, and content analysis was used for qualitative data.
RESULTS
The study included 15 studies (13 quantitative, 1 qualitative, and 1 mixed-methods) evaluating outcomes for at least 1954 women who underwent a bilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (BM) after unilateral breast cancer. The risk of surgical complications after BM was higher than after unilateral mastectomy without reconstruction (UM) but significantly less than after BR. Satisfaction with the decision for BM was high in all the studies. Key themes relating to flat denial, stigma, and gender-based assumptions were identified.
CONCLUSION
Women electing to undergo BM reported high levels of satisfaction with their decision and complication rates similar to those for UM. Further study is needed to comprehensively explore the outcomes for women seeking BM, but these data should give surgeons confidence to offer the procedure as an alternative option for symmetry after unilateral mastectomy for breast cancer.
REGISTRATION
This systematic review was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database (CRD42022353689).
Topics: Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms; Unilateral Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy, Simple
PubMed: 37749407
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-14294-6 -
Clinical Breast Cancer Apr 2024Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a standard modality of treatment for breast cancer. The exposure of patients to drugs that effect the cells and processes involved in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is a standard modality of treatment for breast cancer. The exposure of patients to drugs that effect the cells and processes involved in healing prior to reconstructive surgical procedures is a source of concern for reconstructive surgeons. The reported effects of NAC on autologous and tissue expander to implant-based breast reconstruction vary from study to study and have not been comprehensively reviewed on a large scale. There is also significant variation from study to study regarding which outcomes are evaluated. The primary aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to evaluate the effect of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on common and significant outcomes including total complication, reconstruction loss, and SSI (Surgical Site Infection) rates in breast reconstruction. The second aim of this study is to evaluate whether NAC has differing effects on implant-based reconstruction compared with autologous flap reconstruction. A systematic review of the literature published from 1991 to 2019 in the PubMed and Scopus library database was performed to identify studies reporting outcomes of breast reconstruction in patients receiving NAC. A meta-analysis was then performed. Primary outcomes reviewed included overall complication rates, SSI rates, and total loss of reconstruction (flap necrosis or premature tissue expander or implant removal). Outcomes were analyzed using a random effects model and chi-square statistical test. Our literature search yielded 22 manuscripts with a total of 3680 patients that fit our inclusion criteria, of which 12 reported on reconstruction loss, 14 reported on SSI rates, and 10 reported on overall complication rates. There was no significant difference in overall breast reconstruction loss rate (OR 1.30, P = .35), complication rate (OR 1.21, P = .06), and rate of SSI (OR 1.28, P = .85) between NAC vs. non-NAC groups. In patients undergoing autologous flap reconstruction there were no significant differences in complication (23.4% vs. 17.7%, P = 0.076), loss of reconstruction (3.1% vs. 4.4%, P = .393), or SSI (5.3% vs. 3.4%, P = .108) rates in patients who were treated with NAC compared to those who were not. Likewise, in patients undergoing TE/implant-based reconstruction there were no significant differences in complication (19.6 vs. 24.2 P = .069), loss of reconstruction (17.4% vs. 13.3%, P = .072), or SSI (7.9% vs. 5.1%, P = .073) rates in patients who were treated with NAC compared to those who were not. NAC was not associated with any significant differences in overall complication, reconstruction loss, or SSI rates in patients receiving implant-based or autologous flap breast reconstruction. Additionally, the lack of effect of NAC on overall complication, reconstruction loss or SSI rates did not differ with or depend on the type of reconstruction.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Mammaplasty; Retrospective Studies; Postoperative Complications
PubMed: 38228449
DOI: 10.1016/j.clbc.2023.12.004 -
PLOS Global Public Health 2023It is unclear whether the literature on adolescent gender dysphoria (GD) provides evidence to inform clinical decision making adequately. In the final of a series of...
It is unclear whether the literature on adolescent gender dysphoria (GD) provides evidence to inform clinical decision making adequately. In the final of a series of three papers, we sought to review published evidence systematically regarding the types of treatment being implemented among adolescents with GD, the age when different treatment types are instigated, and any outcomes measured within adolescence. Having searched PROSPERO and the Cochrane library for existing systematic reviews (and finding none at that time), we searched Ovid Medline 1946 -October week 4 2020, Embase 1947-present (updated daily), CINAHL 1983-2020, and PsycInfo 1914-2020. The final search was carried out on 2nd November 2020 using a core strategy including search terms for 'adolescence' and 'gender dysphoria' which was adapted according to the structure of each database. Papers were excluded if they did not clearly report on clinically-likely gender dysphoria, if they were focused on adult populations, if they did not include original data (epidemiological, clinical, or survey) on adolescents (aged at least 12 and under 18 years), or if they were not peer-reviewed journal publications. From 6202 potentially relevant articles (post deduplication), 19 papers from 6 countries representing between 835 and 1354 participants were included in our final sample. All studies were observational cohort studies, usually using retrospective record review (14); all were published in the previous 11 years (median 2018). There was significant overlap of study samples (accounted for in our quantitative synthesis). All papers were rated by two reviewers using the Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool v1·4 (CCAT). The CCAT quality ratings ranged from 71% to 95%, with a mean of 82%. Puberty suppression (PS) was generally induced with Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone analogues (GnRHa), and at a pooled mean age of 14.5 (±1.0) years. Cross Sex Hormone (CSH) therapy was initiated at a pooled mean of 16.2 (±1.0) years. Twenty-five participants from 2 samples were reported to have received surgical intervention (24 mastectomy, one vaginoplasty). Most changes to health parameters were inconclusive, except an observed decrease in bone density z-scores with puberty suppression, which then increased with hormone treatment. There may also be a risk for increased obesity. Some improvements were observed in global functioning and depressive symptoms once treatment was started. The most common side effects observed were acne, fatigue, changes in appetite, headaches, and mood swings. Adolescents presenting for GD intervention were usually offered puberty suppression or cross-sex hormones, but rarely surgical intervention. Reporting centres broadly followed established international guidance regarding age of treatment and treatments used. The evidence base for the outcomes of gender dysphoria treatment in adolescents is lacking. It is impossible from the included data to draw definitive conclusions regarding the safety of treatment. There remain areas of concern, particularly changes to bone density caused by puberty suppression, which may not be fully resolved with hormone treatment.
PubMed: 37552651
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pgph.0001478 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Dec 2023There is no definitive answer regarding the efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumour bed boost for patients with early-stage breast cancer. The purpose... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Intraoperative Radiotherapy as a Tumour-Bed Boost Combined with Whole Breast Irradiation Versus Conventional Radiotherapy in Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.
BACKGROUND
There is no definitive answer regarding the efficacy of intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) as a tumour bed boost for patients with early-stage breast cancer. The purpose of this meta-analysis was to summarise the available evidence and explore the efficacy and safety of IORT combined with whole breast irradiation (WBI) versus conventional radiotherapy in women with early-stage breast cancer who underwent breast-conserving surgery.
METHODS
The PUBMED, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to December 31, 2022. We collected studies on the efficacy, cosmetic outcome, and safety of IORT boost combined with WBI compared with those of conventional radiotherapy in patients with early-stage breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery. Two authors independently performed the literature selection and data extraction. The quality of the randomised, controlled trials (RCTs) was assessed according to the PEDro scale. The quality of non-RCTs was assessed according to the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies. Risk ratios (RRs) for the local recurrence rate (LRR), distant metastasis rate (DMR), disease-free survival (DFS), cosmetic outcome, and toxicity were pooled using fixed or random effects models. Meta-analysis of the included studies was performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.
RESULTS
Nine studies, including one RCT and eight non-RCTs, with a total of 3219 patients were included. In terms of LRR, there was no significant benefit of IORT boost+WBI over conventional radiotherapy (with or without the tumour bed boost) (RR = 0.77, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.54-1.09, P = 0.14), but a trend towards benefit could be identified. There was a significant reduction in DMR in the IORT boost+WBI group (RR = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.46-0.85, P = 0.003) and a significant improvement in DFS (RR = 0.40, 95% CI: 0.25-0.65, P = 0.0002). Exploratory subgroup analysis showed that the DMR and DFS of the electron boost group were significantly better than those of conventional radiotherapy group, and there was a tendency for LRR to improve in the electron boost group. However, the LRR, DMR, and DFS did not effectively improve in the x-ray boost group. In terms of appearance and toxicity, there were no significant differences in cosmetic outcome, fibrosis, and hyperpigmentation between the two groups (RR = 0.99, 95% CI: 0.91-1.07, P = 0.78; RR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.41-2.56, P = 0.96; RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.10-1.72, P = 0.23), but the incidence of oedema was significantly reduced in the IORT boost+WBI group (RR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.13-0.59, P = 0.0009).
CONCLUSIONS
IORT boost+WBI is more effective than conventional radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery in patients with early-stage breast cancer, and electron boost exhibits better efficacy than x-ray boost. In addition, the cosmetic and safety profiles of IORT boost+WBI are not inferior to those of conventional radiotherapy.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy, Segmental; Disease-Free Survival; Progression-Free Survival
PubMed: 37507556
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-023-13955-w -
Aesthetic Plastic Surgery May 2024Exclusive fat grafting is an alternative method to implant- or flap- based reconstruction techniques following mastectomies or breast conservation therapies. Its... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Exclusive fat grafting is an alternative method to implant- or flap- based reconstruction techniques following mastectomies or breast conservation therapies. Its efficacy has been explored before but new data has come to light, resulting in previous results becoming outdated. Concerns have also been raised about the oncological safety of this procedure which must be evaluated alongside the efficacy to gain a comprehensive understanding of the merits of this alternative technique.
METHODS
We queried the PubMed electronic database from its inception until August 2023 for studies evaluating the efficacy and oncological safety of exclusive fat grafting breast reconstruction following cancer-related mastectomy or breast conservation therapy. Results of the analysis were pooled and presented as means or valid proportions. Results of the analysis were pooled using a random-effects model and presented with 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) where appropriate.
RESULTS
41 studies were included in our analysis. Pooled results show that on average, 1.7 sessions of exclusive fat grafting were required to complete reconstruction in Breast Conservation Therapy (BCT) patients, with an average volume of 114.2 ml being injected. For mastectomy patients with irradiated breasts, 4.7 sessions were needed on average with 556.8 ml being required to complete reconstruction, compared to their non-irradiated Counterparts requiring only 2.6 sessions and 207.2 ml to complete reconstruction. Oncological recurrence events were found in 29/583 non-irradiated mastectomy patients (p = 0.014) and in 41/517 BCT patients (p = 0.301) CONCLUSION: Exclusive fat grafting is an oncologically safe and reasonably efficacious alternative to more common methods of breast reconstruction. More data is needed to fully characterize the oncological safety of this procedure in irradiated and non-irradiated mastectomy patients.
LEVEL OF EVIDENCE III
This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .
PubMed: 38772941
DOI: 10.1007/s00266-024-03978-3 -
Journal of Robotic Surgery Aug 2023The promising results of the robotic approach for multiple cancer operations has led to interest in the potential of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM); however,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
The promising results of the robotic approach for multiple cancer operations has led to interest in the potential of robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-NSM); however, further studies are required to compare the benefits and complications of this approach with those of conventional open nipple-sparing mastectomy (C-NSM). We performed a meta-analysis to compare surgical complications of R-NSM versus C-NSM. We performed a review of literature through June 2022 in PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohorts, case-control studies, and case series with > 50 patients comparing the two techniques. Separate meta-analyses were conducted according to study design. From 80 publications, we identified six studies. The sample size ranged from 63 to 311 mastectomies from 63 to 275 patients. The tumor size and disease stage were similar between groups. The positive margin rate was 0-4.6% in the R-NSM arm and 0-2.9% in the C-NSM arm. Four studies reported early recurrence data, which were similar between groups (R-NSM: 0%, C-NSM: 0-8%). The R-NSM group had a lower rate of overall complications compared to the C-NSM group in cohorts/RCTs (RR = 0.68, 95%CI 0.49-0.96). In case-control studies, rate of necrosis was lower with R-NSM. Operative time was significantly longer in the R-NSM group in cohort/RCTs. In early experience with R-NSM, R-NSM had a lower overall complication rate compared to C-NSM in cohorts/RCTs. While these data are promising, our results show variability and heterogeneity limiting definitive conclusions. Additional trials are needed to guide the role of R-NSM and its oncologic outcomes.
Topics: Female; Humans; Nipples; Robotic Surgical Procedures; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36808041
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-023-01547-5 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023Breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a rare form of non-Hodgkin T-cell lymphoma associated with breast reconstruction post-mastectomy...
INTRODUCTION
Breast implant-associated anaplastic large-cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a rare form of non-Hodgkin T-cell lymphoma associated with breast reconstruction post-mastectomy or cosmetic-additive mammoplasty. The increasing use of implants for cosmetic purposes is expected to lead to an increase in BIA-ALCL cases. This study investigated the main characteristics of the disease and the factors predicting BIA-ALCL onset in patients with and without an implant replacement.
METHODS
A quantitative analysis was performed by two independent researchers on cases extracted from 52 primary studies (case report, case series, and systematic review) published until April 2022 and searched in PubMed, Scopus, and Google-Scholar databases using "Breast-Implant" AND/OR "Associated" AND/OR "Anaplastic-Large-Cell-Lymphoma". The statistical significance was verified by Student's -test for continuous variables, while Fisher's exact test was applied for qualitative variables. Cox model with time-dependent covariates was used to estimate BIA-ALCL's onset time. The Kaplan-Meier model allowed the estimation of the probability of survival after therapy according to breast implant exposure time.
RESULTS
Overall, 232 patients with BIA-ALCL were extracted. The mean age at diagnosis was 55 years old, with a mean time to disease onset from the first implant of 10.3 years. The hazard of developing BIA-ALCL in a shorter time resulted significantly higher for patients not having an implant replacement (hazard ratio = 0.03; 95%CI: 0.005-0.19; -value < 0.01). Patients with implant replacement were significantly older than patients without previous replacement at diagnosis, having a median time to diagnosis since the first implant of 13 years (7 years in patients without replacement); anyway, the median time to BIA-ALCL occurrence since the last implantation was equal to 5 years.
DISCUSSION
Our findings suggest that, in BIA-ALCL patients, the implant substitution and/or capsulectomy may delay the disease's onset. However, the risk of reoccurrence in an earlier time should be considered in these patients. Moreover, the time to BIA-ALCL onset slightly increased with age. Selection bias, lack of awareness, misdiagnosis, and limited data availability could be identified as limits of our study. An implant replacement should be considered according to a risk stratification approach to delay the BIA-ALCL occurrence in asymptomatic patients, although a stricter follow-up after the implant substitution should be recommended.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, identifier: CRD42023446726.
PubMed: 37927474
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1202733 -
Cureus Mar 2024This study aims to investigate the relationship between mammographic breast density and the surgical outcomes of breast cancer. PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Science... (Review)
Review
This study aims to investigate the relationship between mammographic breast density and the surgical outcomes of breast cancer. PubMed, SCOPUS, Web of Science, Science Direct, and the Wiley Library were systematically searched for relevant literature. Rayyan QRCI was employed throughout this comprehensive process. Our results included ten studies with a total of 5017 women diagnosed with breast cancer. The follow-up duration ranged from 1 year to 15.1 years. Eight out of the twelve included studies reported that low mammographic breast density was significantly associated with no local recurrence, metachronous contralateral breast cancer, and fewer challenges in the preoperative and intraoperative phases. On the other hand, four studies reported that mammographic breast density is not linked to disease recurrence, survival, re-excision, or an incomplete clinical and pathological response. There is a significant association between low mammographic breast density and reduced challenges in the preoperative and intraoperative phases, as well as no local recurrence and fewer mastectomy cases. However, the link between mammographic breast density and disease recurrence, survival, re-excision, and incomplete clinical and pathological response is less clear, with some studies reporting no significant association. The findings suggest that mammographic breast density may play a role in certain aspects of breast cancer outcomes, but further research is needed to fully understand its impact.
PubMed: 38686256
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.57265 -
Cureus May 2024Novel hybrid approaches for chest wall irradiation show promising outcomes regarding target coverage and sparing organs at risk (OARs). In this systematic review, we... (Review)
Review
Hybrid Treatment Planning for Chest Wall Irradiation Utilizing Three-Dimensional Conformal Radiotherapy (3DCRT), Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy (IMRT), and Volumetric Modulated Arc Therapy (VMAT): A Systematic Review.
Novel hybrid approaches for chest wall irradiation show promising outcomes regarding target coverage and sparing organs at risk (OARs). In this systematic review, we compared hybrid volumetric modulated arc therapy (H-VMAT) or hybrid intensity-modulated radiotherapy (H-IMRT) techniques with non-hybrid techniques, such as three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT), field-in-field (FIF), intensity-modulated arc therapy (IMRT), and volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), for breast cancer patients with mastectomy. Our focus was the plan quality and dose distribution to the OARs. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) checklist, we performed a systematic review and quality appraisal of primary studies evaluating hybrid therapy to the chest wall and the OARs. An extensive online search of PubMed and Scopus databases was conducted using appropriate keywords. The dose to the OARs (lung, heart, and contralateral breast), planning target volume (PTV), homogeneity index (HI), and conformity index (CI) were extracted. The data were then tabulated and compared for the outcomes between modalities among the studies. Nine studies that met the search criteria were selected to evaluate the PTV coverage and dosimetric results of hybrid and non-hybrid techniques. In terms of 95% PTV coverage, among nine reviewed studies, the largest difference between the two techniques was between VMAT (47.6 Gy) and H-VMAT (48.4 Gy); for the conformity index, the largest difference was noted between 3DCRT (0.58) and H-VMAT (0.79). In both cases, differences were statistically significant ( < 0.005). Two studies showed dose homogeneity improvement within the treatment target in H-VMAT (0.15 and 0.07) compared with 3DCRT (0.41 and 0.12), with a value of <0.001. Two studies did not report on the homogeneity index, and three others observed no statistical difference. Regarding OARs, in the comparison of H-VMAT and VMAT, the largest significant change was in the volume receiving 5 Gy (V) of the ipsilateral lung and the V of the contralateral lung. For the ipsilateral lung, V was 90.7% with VMAT versus 51.45% with H-VMAT. For the contralateral lung, V was 54.9% with VMAT versus 50.5% with H-VMAT. In six studies, the mean dose of the contralateral breast was lower in hybrid techniques than in single modalities: VMAT (4.2%, 6.0%, 1.9%, 7.1%, 4.57%) versus H-VMAT (1.4%, 3.4%, 1.8%, 3.5%, 2.34%) and IMRT (9.1%) versus H-IMRT (4.69%). Although most studies did not report on monitor units and treatment time, those that included them showed that hybrids had lower monitor units and shorter treatment times. Hybrid techniques in radiotherapy, such as combining two modalities, can indeed facilitate lower doses to OARs for patients with a high risk of toxicities. Prospective clinical studies are needed to determine the outcomes of breast cancer treated with hybrid techniques.
PubMed: 38832195
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.59583