-
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jul 2023Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has emerged as an alternative procedure for skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Because oncologic... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has emerged as an alternative procedure for skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), followed by immediate breast reconstruction. Because oncologic safety appears similar, patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and complication risks may guide decision-making in individual patients. Therefore, the aim of this systematic review was to compare PROs and complication rates after NSM and SSM.
METHODS
A systematic literature review evaluating NSM versus SSM was performed using the Embase, MEDLINE, and Cochrane databases. Methodologic quality of the included studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Form for Cohort Studies. Primary outcomes were PROs and complications. Studies that evaluated BREAST-Q scores were used to perform meta-analyses on five BREAST-Q domains.
RESULTS
Thirteen comparative studies including 3895 patients were selected from 1202 articles found. Meta-analyses of the BREAST-Q domains showed a significant mean difference of 7.64 in the Sexual Well-being domain ( P = 0.01) and 4.71 in the Psychosocial Well-being domain ( P = 0.03), both in favor of NSM. Using the specifically designed questionnaires, no differences in overall satisfaction scores were found. There were no differences in overall complication rates between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS
Patient satisfaction scores were high after both NSM and SSM; however, NSM led to a higher sexual and psychosocial well-being. No differences in complication rates were found. In combination with other factors, such as oncologic treatments, complication risk profile, and fear of cancer recurrence, the decision for NSM or SSM has to be made on an individual basis and only if NSM is considered to be oncologically safe.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Nipples; Quality of Life; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36728484
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010155 -
Cancers Dec 2022Contrary to traditional assumptions, recent evidence suggests that neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) given for invasive breast cancer may eradicate co-existent ductal... (Review)
Review
Contrary to traditional assumptions, recent evidence suggests that neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) given for invasive breast cancer may eradicate co-existent ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS), which may facilitate de-escalation of breast resections. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the eradication rate of DCIS by NST given for invasive breast cancer. Searches were performed in MEDLINE using appropriate search terms. Six studies (N = 659) in which pathological data were available regarding the presence of DCIS prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) were identified. Only one study investigating the impact of neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) met the search criteria. After pooled analysis, post-NACT pathology showed no residual DCIS in 40.5% of patients (267/659; 95% CI: 36.8-44.3). There was no significant difference in DCIS eradication rate between triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2-positive disease (45% vs. 46% respectively). NET achieved eradication of DCIS in 15% of patients (9/59). Importantly, residual widespread micro-calcifications after NST did not necessarily indicate residual disease. In view of the results of the pooled analysis, the presence of extensive DCIS prior to NST should not mandate mastectomy and de-escalation to breast conserving surgery (BCS) should be considered in patients identified by contrast enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (CE-MRI).
PubMed: 36612009
DOI: 10.3390/cancers15010013 -
Journal of Surgical Oncology Apr 2023We ascertained whether a validated esthetic grading tool for breast reconstruction had been developed and widely adopted since the last published systematic review on...
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
We ascertained whether a validated esthetic grading tool for breast reconstruction had been developed and widely adopted since the last published systematic review on the topic from 2015.
METHODS
We performed a systematic review identifying all studies using a grading tool to assess breast reconstruction, using search terms associated with all types of breast surgery and outcomes research. Articles were assessed for patient number, validated scale use, assessor type and training, assessor blinding, assessment method, scoring system type, type and timing of reconstruction, and usage of corroborating scales.
RESULTS
Of 2809 articles screened, 148 met the criteria. Only 3 used a validated tool, the Esthetic Items Scale. Most used study-only tools (n = 111) or unvalidated tools (n = 28). The most used unvalidated tool was the Garbay/Lowery 5-subscale rubric. Unanchored Likert scales were the most common subjective tool; two-dimensional images were the most used medium. Surgeons, patients, and nurses were the most common assessors. Twenty percent of studies used corroborating scales.
CONCLUSIONS
In the absence of a validated esthetic grading tool for breast reconstruction, researchers continue to rely on unvalidated scales. The only validated scale available is used infrequently and only validated among physicians. A validated, reliable, simple grading tool with clinical and scholastic relevance is needed.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Esthetics
PubMed: 36594965
DOI: 10.1002/jso.27186 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.... Dec 2022Breast reconstruction (BR) is a unique surgical procedure that provides patients undergoing mastectomy with significant psychosocial and aesthetic benefits and has also...
UNLABELLED
Breast reconstruction (BR) is a unique surgical procedure that provides patients undergoing mastectomy with significant psychosocial and aesthetic benefits and has also become a crucial part of the treatment pathway for women with breast cancer. Due to methodological inadequacies and the absence of substantial risk factor analysis, no conclusion can be drawn about the correlation between risk variables and post-surgical complications in BR surgery. We aim to identify the potential risk factors associated with postoperative complications.
METHODS
We queried MEDLINE and Cochrane CENTRAL from their inception to March 2022, for published randomized controlled trials and observational studies that assessed complications post-reconstruction procedure in breast cancer patients following mastectomy or evaluated at least one of the following outcomes of major or reoperative complications. The results from the studies were presented as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals and were pooled using a random-effects model.
RESULTS
Our pooled analysis demonstrated a significant correlation with BR postoperative complications and risk factors such as diabetes, hypertension, and obesity. Diabetes and the development of seroma were found to have a significant relationship. Risk variables such as age, radiotherapy, COPD, and smoking had no significant connection with 0-to-30-day readmission and 30-to-90-day readmission.
CONCLUSION
This meta-analysis shows that risk factors like age, smoking history, high blood pressure, and body mass index (BMI) have a big effect on complications after BR, and patients with risk factors have a high rate of developing infection.
PubMed: 36583164
DOI: 10.1097/GOX.0000000000004693 -
Cancers Dec 2022Policymakers require robust cost-effectiveness evidence of risk-reducing-surgery (RRS) for decision making on resource allocation for breast cancer (BC)/ovarian cancer... (Review)
Review
Policymakers require robust cost-effectiveness evidence of risk-reducing-surgery (RRS) for decision making on resource allocation for breast cancer (BC)/ovarian cancer (OC)/endometrial cancer (EC) prevention. We aimed to summarise published data on the cost-effectiveness of risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM)/risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO)/risk-reducing early salpingectomy and delayed oophorectomy (RRESDO) for BC/OC prevention in intermediate/high-risk populations; hysterectomy and bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) in Lynch syndrome women; and opportunistic bilateral salpingectomy (OBS) for OC prevention in baseline-risk populations. Major databases were searched until December 2021 following a prospective protocol (PROSPERO-CRD42022338008). Data were qualitatively synthesised following a PICO framework. Twenty two studies were included, with a reporting quality varying from 53.6% to 82.1% of the items scored in the CHEERS checklist. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio/incremental cost-utility ratio and cost thresholds were inflated and converted to US$2020, using the original currency consumer price index (CPI) and purchasing power parities (PPP), for comparison. Eight studies concluded that RRM and/or RRSO were cost-effective compared to surveillance/no surgery for , while RRESDO was cost-effective compared to RRSO in one study. Three studies found that hysterectomy with BSO was cost-effective compared to surveillance in Lynch syndrome women. Two studies showed that RRSO was also cost-effective at ≥4%/≥5% lifetime OC risk for pre-/post-menopausal women, respectively. Seven studies demonstrated the cost-effectiveness of OBS at hysterectomy (n = 4), laparoscopic sterilisation (n = 4) or caesarean section (n = 2). This systematic review confirms that RRS is cost-effective, while the results are context-specific, given the diversity in the target populations, health systems and model assumptions, and sensitive to the disutility, age and uptake rates associated with RRS. Additionally, RRESDO/OBS were sensitive to the uncertainty concerning the effect sizes in terms of the OC-risk reduction and long-term health impact. Our findings are relevant for policymakers/service providers and the design of future research studies.
PubMed: 36551605
DOI: 10.3390/cancers14246117 -
The Breast Journal 2022As breast-conserving procedures become increasingly safe and viable options for surgical management of breast cancer, efforts have focused on assessing and optimizing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
As breast-conserving procedures become increasingly safe and viable options for surgical management of breast cancer, efforts have focused on assessing and optimizing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs), such as nipple sensation. This study aims to evaluate the current understanding of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) sensation outcomes in breast cancer patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries, namely, nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM), and lumpectomies.
METHODS
Articles including terms related to "nipple," "mastectomy," "sensation," and "patient-reported outcome" were queried from three databases according to PRISMA guidelines. Study characteristics, patient demographics, and surgical details were recorded. Outcomes of interest included objective nipple sensitivity testing and PROMs.
RESULTS
Of 888 manuscripts identified, 28 articles met the inclusion criteria. Twelve studies ( = 578 patients) used objective measures to evaluate sensitivity, such as monofilament testing. Sixteen studies ( = 1785 patients) assessed PROMs through validated or investigator-generated surveys. Three of the included studies reported NAC sensitivity in patients who received NSM with neurotization ( = 203 patients) through a variety of techniques that used various grafts to coapt a lateral intercostal nerve to the NAC nerve stumps. Results of investigator surveys showed that of 1565 patients without neurotization, nipple sensation was maintained in 29.0% ( = 453) of patients. Of 138 NSM patients without NAC neurotization, SWM testing showed an average loss of protective sensation in the nipple (average SWM score: 4.7) compared to normal or diminished sensation to light touch in nonoperated controls (average SWM score: 2.9, = 195). Of patients who underwent NSM with neurotization, one study ( = 78) reported maintenance of NAC sensation in 100% of patients, while another study ( = 7) reported average diminished protective sensation in the nipple (average SWM score: 3.9).
CONCLUSION
Our study has shown that objective and patient-reported results of nipple sensitivity support nipple-sparing techniques as a viable option for preserving NAC sensation, although patients can expect a decrease in sensation overall. Neurotization of the NAC during NSM shows promising results of improved postoperative nipple sensitivity, though additional studies are warranted to confirm this finding. Variations between study methodologies highlight the lack of standardization in sensory testing techniques when evaluating NAC sensation.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 36474965
DOI: 10.1155/2022/9654741 -
Journal of Perianesthesia Nursing :... Apr 2023To summarize and analyze available evidence on perioperative accelerated rehabilitation programs for patients diagnosed with breast cancer that have had a radical... (Review)
Review
PURPOSE
To summarize and analyze available evidence on perioperative accelerated rehabilitation programs for patients diagnosed with breast cancer that have had a radical mastectomy.
DESIGN
This article is a systematic review of literature based on evidence-based methodology.
METHODS
The '6S' evidence resource pyramid model was used to systematically search a range of databases.
FINDINGS
A total of 19 articles were extracted from the literature and used in this study, including 9 clinical decisions, 4 systematic evaluations, 4 expert consensuses, and 2 guidelines. We summarized a total of 47 lines of evidence with regard to various aspects, including preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative nursing measures.
CONCLUSIONS
In this systematic review, an evidence-based methodology was used to summarize and analyze the best suggestions for perioperative accelerated rehabilitation nursing programs for breast cancer inpatients undergoing radical mastectomy. We aimed to provide a good reference value and evidence-based guidelines for the continuous improvement and development of nursing practice for the breast cancer patient population.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy; Mastectomy, Radical
PubMed: 36464572
DOI: 10.1016/j.jopan.2022.06.008 -
JAMA Network Open Dec 2022A discrepancy on current guidelines and clinical practice exists regarding routine imaging surveillance after mastectomy, mainly regarding the lack of adequate evidence... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
IMPORTANCE
A discrepancy on current guidelines and clinical practice exists regarding routine imaging surveillance after mastectomy, mainly regarding the lack of adequate evidence for imaging in this setting.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the usefulness of imaging surveillance in terms of cancer detection and interval cancer rates after mastectomy with or without reconstruction for patients with prior breast cancer.
DATA SOURCES
A comprehensive literature search was conducted in 3 electronic databases-PubMed, ISI Web of Science, and Scopus-without year restriction. References from relevant reviews and eligible studies were also manually searched.
STUDY SELECTION
Eligible studies were defined as those conducting surveillance imaging (mammography, ultrasonography, or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) of patients with prior breast cancer after mastectomy with or without reconstruction that presented adequate data to calculate cancer detection rates for each surveillance method.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Independent data extraction by 2 investigators with consensus on discrepant results was performed. A quality assessment of studies was performed using the QUADAS-2 (Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2) template. The generalized linear mixed model framework with both fixed-effects and random-effects models was used to meta-analyze the proportion of cases across studies including 3 variables: surveillance method, reconstruction after mastectomy, and surveillance measure.
MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES
Three outcome measures were calculated for each eligible study and each surveillance imaging method within studies: overall cancer detection (defined as ipsilateral cancer, both palpable and nonpalpable) rate per 1000 examinations, clinically occult (nonpalpable) cancer detection rate per 1000 examinations, and interval cancer rate per 1000 examinations.
RESULTS
In total, 16 studies were eligible for the meta-analysis. The pooled overall cancer detection rates per 1000 examinations were 1.86 (95% CI, 1.05-3.30) for mammography, 2.66 (95% CI, 1.48-4.76) for ultrasonography, and 5.17 (95% CI, 1.49-17.75) for MRI. For mastectomy without reconstruction, the rate of clinically occult (nonpalpable) cancer per 1000 examinations (2.96; 95% CI, 1.38-6.32) and the interval cancer rate per 1000 examinations (3.73; 95% CI, 0.84-3.98) were lower than the overall cancer detection rate (including both palpable and nonpalpable lesions) per 1000 examinations (6.41; 95% CI, 3.09-13.25) across all imaging modalities. The interval cancer rate per 1000 examinations for mastectomy with reconstruction (3.73; 95% CI, 0.41-2.73) was comparable to the pooled cancer detection rate per 1000 examinations (4.73; 95% CI, 2.32-9.63) across all imaging modalities. In all clinical scenarios and imaging modalities, lower rates of clinically occult cancer compared with cancer detection rates were observed.
CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE
Lower detection rates of clinically occult-compared with overall-cancer across all 3 imaging modalities challenge the use of imaging surveillance after mastectomy, with or without reconstruction. Findings suggest that imaging surveillance in this context is unnecessary in clinical practice, at least until further studies demonstrate otherwise. Future studies should consider using the clinically occult cancer detection rate as a more clinically relevant measure in this setting.
Topics: Humans; Female; Mastectomy; Breast Neoplasms; Mammography; Physical Examination; Consensus
PubMed: 36454573
DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.44212 -
International Journal of Environmental... Oct 2022The present review aimed to systematically review skin toxicity changes following breast cancer radiotherapy (RT) using ultrasound (US). PubMed and Scopus databases were... (Review)
Review
The present review aimed to systematically review skin toxicity changes following breast cancer radiotherapy (RT) using ultrasound (US). PubMed and Scopus databases were searched according to PRISMA guidelines. The characteristics of the selected studies, measured parameters, US skin findings, and their association with clinical assessments were extracted. Seventeen studies were included with a median sample size of 29 (range 11-166). There were significant US skin changes in the irradiated skin compared to the nonirradiated skin or baseline measurements. The most observed change is skin thickening secondary to radiation-induced oedema, except one study found skin thinning after pure postmastectomy RT. However, eight studies reported skin thickening predated RT attributed to axillary surgery. Four studies used US radiofrequency (RF) signals and found a decrease in the hypodermis's Pearson correlation coefficient (PCC). Three studies reported decreased dermal echogenicity and poor visibility of the dermis-subcutaneous fat boundary (statistically analysed by one report). The present review revealed significant ultrasonographic skin toxicity changes in the irradiated skin most commonly skin thickening. However, further studies with large cohorts, appropriate US protocol, and baseline evaluation are needed. Measuring other US skin parameters and statistically evaluating the degree of the association with clinical assessments are also encouraged.
Topics: Humans; Female; Breast Neoplasms; Mastectomy; Breast; Skin Diseases; Skin
PubMed: 36294025
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph192013439 -
Annals of Surgical Oncology Jan 2023Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) remains the standard and most popular option for women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy worldwide. Recently,... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) remains the standard and most popular option for women undergoing breast reconstruction after mastectomy worldwide. Recently, prepectoral IBBR has resurged in popularity, despite limited data comparing prepectoral with subpectoral IBBR.
METHODS
A systematic search of PubMed and Cochrane Library from January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2021, was performed following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines, data were extracted by independent reviewers. Studies that compared prepectoral with subpectoral IBBR for breast cancer were included.
RESULTS
Overall, 15 studies with 3,101 patients were included in this meta-analysis. Our results showed that patients receiving prepectoral IBBR experienced fewer capsular contractures (odds ratio [OR], 0.54; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.32-0.92; P = 0.02), animation deformity (OR, 0.02; 95% CI, 0.00-0.25; P = 0.002), and prosthesis failure (OR, 0.58; 95% CI, 0.42-0.80; P = 0.001). There was no significant difference between prepectoral and subpectoral IBBR in overall complications (OR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.64-1.09; P = 0.19), seroma (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 0.59-2.51; P = 0.60), hematoma (OR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.49-1.18; P = 0.22), infection (OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.63-1.20; P = 0.39), skin flap necrosis (OR, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.45-1.08; P = 0.11), and recurrence (OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 0.52-3.39; P = 0.55). Similarly, no significant difference was found in Breast-Q scores between the prepectoral and subpectoral IBBR groups.
CONCLUSIONS
The results of our systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that prepectoral, implant-based, breast reconstruction is a safe modality and has similar outcomes with significantly lower rates of capsular contracture, prosthesis failure, and animation deformity compared with subpectoral, implant-based, breast reconstruction.
Topics: Female; Humans; Breast Neoplasms; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Prosthesis Failure
PubMed: 36245049
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-12567-0