-
Journal of Robotic Surgery Apr 2022Breast cancer is worldwide the most common cause of cancer in women and causes the second most common cancer-related death. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is commonly... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Breast cancer is worldwide the most common cause of cancer in women and causes the second most common cancer-related death. Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is commonly used in therapeutic and prophylactic settings. Furthermore, (preventive) mastectomies are, besides complications, also associated with psychological and cosmetic consequences. Robotic NSM (RNSM) allows for better visualization of the planes and reducing the invasiveness. The aim of this study was to compare the postoperative complication rate of RNSM to NSM. A systematic search was performed on all (R)NSM articles. The primary outcome was determining the overall postoperative complication rate of traditional NSM and RNSM. Secondary outcomes were comparing the specific postoperative complication rates: implant loss, hematoma, (flap)necrosis, infection, and seroma. Forty-nine studies containing 13,886 cases of (R)NSM were included. No statistically significant differences were found regarding postoperative complications (RNSM 3.9%, NSM 7.0%, p = 0.070), postoperative implant loss (RNSM 4.1%, NSM 3.2%, p = 0.523), hematomas (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.059), necrosis (RNSM 4.3%, NSM 7.4%, p = 0.230), infection (RNSM 8.3%, NSM 4.0%, p = 0.054) or seromas (RNSM 3.0%, NSM 2.0%, p = 0.421). Overall, there are no statistically significant differences in complication rates between NSM and RNSM.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Nipples; Retrospective Studies; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 34128142
DOI: 10.1007/s11701-021-01265-w -
Annals of Plastic Surgery Oct 2021Complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction are distressing for patients, and their management is challenging. For decades, negative-pressure wound therapy... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction are distressing for patients, and their management is challenging. For decades, negative-pressure wound therapy (NPWT) has been successfully used for the closure of complex wounds. This study analyzes the outcomes of NPWT use in the prevention and management of complications from prosthetic breast reconstruction.
METHOD
A systematic search of studies published until August 2020 was conducted using the PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Ebscohost/CINAHL databases and using the following key words: "negative-pressure wound therapy," "breast reconstruction," and "prosthesis" (including breast implants and tissue expanders). Analyzed endpoints were outcomes of NPWT use in prosthetic breast reconstruction compared with conventional dressings. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed independently. Comparative studies were further meta-analyzed to obtain pooled odds ratios (ORs) describing the effectiveness of NPWT in prosthetic breast reconstruction.
RESULTS/DISCUSSION
Ten studies were included with a total of 787 patients (1230 breasts) undergoing prosthetic breast reconstruction with breast implants or tissue expanders. Three case-control studies focused on preventing breast wound complications. The meta-analysis of the 3 studies included 502 breasts receiving NPWT and 698 breasts receiving conventional wound care. The meta-analysis favored NPWT for less mastectomy flap necrosis (5.6% vs 14.3%; OR, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.27 -0.77; P = 0.004; I2 = 0%) and less overall wound complications (10.6% vs 21.1%; OR, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.35-0.70; P < 0.00001; I2 = 0%). In the management of nipple-areolar complex venous congestion, 1 case report demonstrated 85% rescue of nipple-areolar complex after using NPWT (-75 mm Hg) for a total of 12 days. In the management of periprosthetic infections, 2 case series used NPWT with instillation. It accelerated the treatment of infection and maintained the breast cavity for future reconstruction. Conventional NPWT also showed good salvage outcome in four studies.
CONCLUSIONS
Current evidence suggests that prophylactic use of NPWT in prosthetic breast reconstruction reduces the rate of overall wound complications and mastectomy flap necrosis. In the management of complications from prosthetic breast reconstructions, NPWT may be a promising option showing beneficial results. Additional high-quality trials are warranted to corroborate the findings of this systematic review.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Negative-Pressure Wound Therapy; Surgical Wound Infection; Wound Healing
PubMed: 34060773
DOI: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002722 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery May 2021Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a significant public health concern for women with breast implants. The increase in incidence...
BACKGROUND
Breast implant-associated anaplastic large cell lymphoma (BIA-ALCL) is a significant public health concern for women with breast implants. The increase in incidence rates underscores the need for improved methods for risk reduction and risk management. The purpose of this study was to perform a systematic review to assess surgical risk reduction techniques and analyze communication/informed consent practices in patients with textured implants.
METHODS
A systematic review of the literature was conducted in PubMed (legacy), Embase (Embase.com), and Scopus with four search strategies including key terms centered around breast reconstruction and BIA-ALCL.
RESULTS
A total of 571 articles were identified, of which 276 were included in the final review after duplicates were removed. After review, no articles were determined to fit the inclusion criteria of demonstrating data-driven evidence of BIA-ALCL risk reduction through surgical measures, demonstrating a significant lack of data on risk reduction for BIA-ALCL.
CONCLUSIONS
Risk management for BIA-ALCL is an evolving area requiring additional investigation. Although removal of textured devices in asymptomatic patients is not currently recommended by the Food and Drug Administration, variability in estimates of risk has led many patients to electively replace these implants in an effort to decrease their risk of developing BIA-ALCL. To date, however, there is no evidence supporting the concept that replacing textured implants with smooth implants reduces risk for this disease. This information should be used to aid in the informed consent process for patients presenting to discuss management of textured breast implants.
Topics: Asymptomatic Diseases; Breast Implants; Breast Neoplasms; Decision Making, Shared; Device Removal; Elective Surgical Procedures; Esthetics; Female; Humans; Incidence; Informed Consent; Lymphoma, Large-Cell, Anaplastic; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Population Surveillance; Postoperative Complications; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Risk; Risk Management; Risk Reduction Behavior; Surface Properties
PubMed: 33890875
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000008040 -
Clinical Genetics Aug 2021Improper medical use of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) remains a concern in hereditary cancer genetic testing. The goal of this study was to assess the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Improper medical use of variant of uncertain significance (VUS) remains a concern in hereditary cancer genetic testing. The goal of this study was to assess the association between pathogenic and likely pathogenic (P/LP), VUS, and benign and likely benign (B/LB) genetic test results and cancer-related surgical and screening management. Systematic searches of Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL Plus, and PsycINFO were conducted from 1946 to August 26, 2020. Eligible studies included individuals with cancer genetic test result and surgical or screening management outcomes. We reviewed 885 abstracts and 22 studies that reported relevant surgical and screening outcomes were included. Meta-analysis revealed significantly higher surgical rates among individuals with P/LP than among those with VUS for therapeutic mastectomy with contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 7.35, 95% CI, 4.14-13.64), prophylactic mastectomy (OR = 3.05, 95% CI, 1.5-6.19), and oophorectomy (OR = 6.46, 95% CI, 3.64-11.44). There were no significant differences in therapeutic mastectomy, or breast conservation or lumpectomy rates between individuals with P/LP and VUS, or in any outcomes between patients with VUS and B/LB. Studies evaluating screening outcomes were limited, and results were conflicting. Comprehensive analysis do not indicate that a significant number of individuals with VUS results undergo inappropriate clinical management.
Topics: BRCA1 Protein; BRCA2 Protein; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Genetic Testing; Humans; Middle Aged; Ovarian Neoplasms; Ovariectomy; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Prophylactic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 33843052
DOI: 10.1111/cge.13966 -
Cureus Sep 2020Gastric cancer is the third-most fatal cancer in the world. Though over the years, we saw patients mostly with intestinal type accounting for the highest mortality... (Review)
Review
Gastric cancer is the third-most fatal cancer in the world. Though over the years, we saw patients mostly with intestinal type accounting for the highest mortality rate, the recent rise of the diffuse form with germline E-cadherin (CDH1) mutations has added a whole new level of interest to study in detail about the association between CDH1 and diffuse gastric cancer (DGC). This introduced a set guideline formulated by Internal Gastric Cancer Linkage Consortium (IGCLC) for patients with family history of diffuse gastric cancer and invasive lobular breast cancer (ILBC). The analysis of this link was also important to set proper management protocol for patients who were CDH1 mutation carriers which now involves genetic counselling, endoscopic surveillance and screening and prophylactic total gastrectomy (PTG). The study was conducted in accordance to the 'PRISMA guidelines for reporting systematic review and meta-analysis'. Peer-reviewed studies were included from the PubMed database and relevant articles were selected to be included in the study. Appropriate inclusion/exclusion criteria with free full text English articles were applied while selecting the articles. A total of 10 studies on review with different study populations showed that of the 42 patients who were diagnosed with diffuse gastric cancer, 88% of them showed a positive germline E-cadherin gene mutation and 100% of the CDH1 mutation carriers showed microscopic changes of signet ring cell adenocarcinoma of the stomach. The beneficial effects of PTG with better survival rates and low mortality rates has outweighed other treatment modalities. Laparoscopic approach has proved to be more useful and a safer approach for gastrectomy surgeries with better post-operative management. The need for prophylactic mastectomy is also increased in the recent times and thus this requires a new set of guidelines for ILBC patients with hereditary diffuse gastric cancer (HDGC) syndrome.
PubMed: 33062523
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.10406 -
The British Journal of Surgery Nov 2020The growing volume of studies of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy requires critical assessment. This review synthesizes the data on safety, feasibility,...
BACKGROUND
The growing volume of studies of robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy requires critical assessment. This review synthesizes the data on safety, feasibility, oncological and cosmetic outcomes, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) for robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy.
METHODS
A systematic review was performed using MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process/ePubs, Embase/Embase Classic, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, LILACS, PubMed, ClinicalTrials.Gov, WHO ICTRP and the grey literature. Original studies reporting on patients with breast cancer or at increased risk of breast cancer undergoing robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy were included. Risk of bias was assessed using the Institute of Health Economics Case Series Quality Appraisal Checklist.
RESULTS
Of 7177 titles screened, eight articles were included, reporting on 249 robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomies in 187 women. The indication was either therapeutic (58·6 per cent) or prophylactic (41·4 per cent), with immediate reconstruction performed in 96·8 per cent. Surgical techniques followed a similar approach, with variations in incision, robot models, camera and insufflation. Postoperative morbidity included skin complications, lymphocele, infection, seroma, haematoma and skin ischaemia/necrosis. Complications specific to the nipple-areolar complex included ischaemia and necrosis. There were two conversions owing to haemorrhage, but no intraoperative deaths. Three patients had positive margins. Follow-up time ranged from 3·4 to 44·8 months. Locoregional recurrences were not observed. PROMs and objective cosmetic outcomes were reported inconsistently. Data on nipple sensitivity were not reported.
CONCLUSION
Robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy is feasible with acceptable short-term outcomes but it remains in the assessment phase.
Topics: Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Nipples; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Robotic Surgical Procedures
PubMed: 32846014
DOI: 10.1002/bjs.11837 -
Medicine Jul 2020Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication after mastectomy. Although many researches have been studied the prophylactic effect of antiemetics,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication after mastectomy. Although many researches have been studied the prophylactic effect of antiemetics, none of the results are effective. To overcome this problem, dexamethasone was used to relieve the occurrence of PONV. Since concerns about steroid-related morbidity still remain, We carried out a meta-analysis to evaluate the impact of prophylactic dexamethasone on PONV, post-operative pain undergoing mastectomy.
METHODS
Literature search was conducted through PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Cochrane library database till June 2019 to identify eligible studies. Meanwhile, we also consulted some Chinese periodicals, such as China Academic Journals, Wanfang and Weipu. The research was reported according to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. Randomized controlled trials were included in our meta-analysis. Meanwhile, the assessment of the risk of bias was conducted according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions version. The pooled data are processed by software RevMan 5.3.
RESULTS
Four studies with 490 patients were enrolled to this meta-analysis. Our study demonstrated that the dexamethasone group was significantly more effective than the placebo group in term of PONV (risk ratio [RR] = 0.46, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 0.30-0.70, P = .0003), nausea (RR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.10-0.68, P = .006) and vomiting (RR = 0.15, 95% CI: 0.04∼0.55, P = .004). The visual analog scale score was significantly diminished at 1 hour (weighted mean difference = -1.40, 95% CI: -1.53 to -1.26, P < .00001) in the dexamethasone group, while, no statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of visual analog scale at 24 hours (weighted mean difference = -0.56, 95% CI: -1.24 to 0.13, P = 0.11).
CONCLUSION
Not only does Dexamethasone reduce the incidence of PONV but also decreases postoperative pain. However, we still need larger samples and higher quality studies to determine the relationship between symptoms and administration time to reach the conclusion.
TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER
PROSPERO CRD 42018118575.
Topics: Antiemetics; Dexamethasone; Humans; Mastectomy; Pain, Postoperative; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting
PubMed: 32791759
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000021417 -
JAMA Surgery Aug 2020Overtreatment of early-stage breast cancer results in increased morbidity and cost without improving survival. Major surgical organizations participating in the Choosing...
IMPORTANCE
Overtreatment of early-stage breast cancer results in increased morbidity and cost without improving survival. Major surgical organizations participating in the Choosing Wisely campaign identified 4 breast cancer operations as low value: (1) axillary lymph node dissection for limited nodal disease in patients receiving lumpectomy and radiation, (2) re-excision for close but negative lumpectomy margins for invasive cancer, (3) contralateral prophylactic mastectomy in patients at average risk with unilateral cancer, and (4) sentinel lymph node biopsy in women 70 years or older with hormone receptor-positive cancer.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the extent to which these procedures have been deimplemented, determine the implications of decreased use, and recognize possible barriers and facilitators to deimplementation.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
A systematic review of published literature on use trends in breast surgery was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. The Ovid, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, and Cochrane databases were searched for original research with relevance to the Choosing Wisely recommendations of interest. Eligible studies were examined for data about use, and any patient-level, clinician-level, or system-level factors associated with use.
FINDINGS
Concordant with recommendations, national rates of axillary lymph node dissection for patients with limited nodal disease have decreased by approximately 50% (from 44% in 2011 to 30% to 34% in 2012 and 25% to 28% in 2013), and national rates of lumpectomy margin re-excision have decreased by nearly 40% (from 16% to 34% before to 14% to 18% after publication of a consensus statement). Conversely, national rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy continue to rise each year, accounting for up to 30% of all mastectomies for breast cancer (range in all mastectomy cases: 2010-2012, 28%-30%; 1998, <2%), and rates of sentinel lymph node biopsy in women 70 years or older with low-risk breast cancer are persistently greater than 80% (range, 80%-88%). Factors associated with high rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy use are younger age, white race, increased socioeconomic status, and the availability of breast reconstruction; limited data exist on factors associated with high rates of sentinel lymph node biopsy in women 70 years or older. Successful deimplementation of axillary lymph node dissection and lumpectomy margin re-excision were associated with decreased costs and improved patient-centered outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
This review demonstrates variable deimplementation of 4 low-value surgical procedures in patients with breast cancer. Addressing specific patient-level, clinician-level, and system-level barriers to deimplementation is necessary to encourage shared decision-making and reduce overtreatment.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Clinical Decision-Making; Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Practice Guidelines as Topic; Procedures and Techniques Utilization; Value-Based Health Insurance
PubMed: 32492121
DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2020.0322 -
Psycho-oncology Jun 2020The rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women with early, unilateral cancer is relatively high and is increasing around the world a previous study....
OBJECTIVE
The rate of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in women with early, unilateral cancer is relatively high and is increasing around the world a previous study. Women choose this option for many reasons other than reducing their risk of future cancer, including symmetry, reasons related to breast reconstruction and attempting to manage fear of recurrence. This systematic review evaluated patient-reported quality of life outcomes following CPM.
METHODS
A literature search of MEDLINE, PubMed and PsycINFO was performed to February 2019. Abstracts and full-text articles were assessed for eligibility according to pre-determined criteria. Data were extracted into evidence tables for analysis.
RESULTS
A total of 19 articles met eligibility criteria and were included in analysis. These included patient-reported data from 6088 women undergoing CPM. They reported high levels of satisfaction with the decision for surgery, low levels of decisional regret and high satisfaction with cosmesis and reconstruction. Breast-specific and general quality of life was high overall but was even better in women choosing breast reconstruction after surgery. Fear of cancer recurrence was high after CPM. Depression, distress and a negative impact on body image were evident; however, levels were high in both CPM and non-CPM groups.
CONCLUSIONS
This study provides information that can be used by surgeons and psychologists when counselling women about the potential benefits and harms of CPM. This process must include discussion about the trade-offs such as body image issues and ongoing fear of recurrence in addition to the positive aspect of cancer risk reduction. Women are unlikely to regret their decision for CPM.
Topics: Adult; Body Image; Decision Making; Female; Humans; Longitudinal Studies; Mammaplasty; Middle Aged; Neoplasm Recurrence, Local; Patient Acceptance of Health Care; Patient Reported Outcome Measures; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Quality of Life; Self Efficacy; Unilateral Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 32201988
DOI: 10.1002/pon.5379 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2019Surgery has been used as part of breast cancer treatment for centuries; however any surgical procedure has the potential risk of infection. Infection rates for surgical...
BACKGROUND
Surgery has been used as part of breast cancer treatment for centuries; however any surgical procedure has the potential risk of infection. Infection rates for surgical treatment of breast cancer are documented at between 3% and 15%, higher than average for a clean surgical procedure. Pre- and perioperative antibiotics have been found to be useful in lowering infection rates in other surgical groups, yet there is no consensus on the use of prophylactic antibiotics for breast cancer surgery. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2005 and last updated in 2014.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effects of prophylactic (pre- or perioperative) antibiotics on the incidence of surgical site infection (SSI) after breast cancer surgery.
SEARCH METHODS
For this fourth update, in August 2018 we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase; and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trials registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned reference lists of relevant included studies as well as reviews, meta-analyses and health technology reports to identify additional studies. There were no restrictions with respect to language, date of publication or study setting.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of pre- and perioperative antibiotics for patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer. Primary outcomes were rates of surgical site infection (SSI) and adverse reactions.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently examined the title and abstracts of all studies identified by the search strategy, then assessed study quality and extracted data from those that met the inclusion criteria. We contacted study authors to obtain missing information. We evaluated the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.
MAIN RESULTS
A total of 11 randomised controlled trials (2867 participants) were included in the review. No new studies were identified in this update. All studies included breast cancer patients and were based in the hospital setting. Ten studies evaluated preoperative antibiotic compared with no antibiotic or placebo. One study evaluated perioperative antibiotic compared with placebo or no antibiotic. Pooling of the results demonstrated that prophylactic antibiotics administered preoperatively probably reduce the incidence of SSI for patients undergoing breast cancer surgery without reconstruction (pooled risk ratio (RR) 0.67, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.53 to 0.85; moderate certainty evidence). Anticipated absolute effects were calculated for the outcome incidence of SSI; 105 per 1000 for the none or placebo group and 71 per 1000 (95% CI 56 to 89) for the preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis group. Analysis of the single study comparing perioperative antibiotic with no antibiotic was inconclusive for incidence of SSI (RR 0.11, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.95; very low certainty evidence). No studies presented separate data for patients who underwent reconstructive surgery at the time of removal of the breast tumour.Secondary outcomes were not consistently included in the studies investigating preoperative antibiotic prophylaxis. It is very uncertain whether there is a difference in incidence of adverse events between the treatment and no treatment or placebo groups (10 studies, 2818 participants); very low certainty evidence downgraded one level for serious risk of bias, one level for serious inconsistency and one level for serious imprecision. It is unclear whether there is a difference in time to onset of infection between the treatment and no treatment or placebo groups (4 studies, 1450 participants); low certainty evidence downgraded one level for serious risk of bias and one level for serious inconsistency. It is unclear whether there is a difference in rates of readmission to hospital between the treatment and placebo groups (3 studies, 784 participants); low certainty evidence downgraded one level for serious inconsistency and one level for serious risk of bias. It is unclear whether there is a difference in cost of care between the treatment and no treatment or placebo groups (2 studies, 510 participants); low certainty evidence downgraded one level for serious risk of bias and one level for serious inconsistency. No analysable secondary outcome data were reported for the single study evaluating perioperative antibiotics.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Prophylactic antibiotics administered preoperatively probably reduce the risk of SSI in patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer. However, it is very uncertain whether there is an effect on incidence of adverse events. Furthermore, the effects on time to onset of infection, readmission to hospital and cost of care remain unclear. Further studies are required to establish the best protocols for clinical practice.
Topics: Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Preoperative Care; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Surgical Wound Infection; Wound Healing
PubMed: 31557310
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005360.pub5