-
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Nov 2017Postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction in the U.S. continues to experience an upward trend owing to heightened awareness, innovations in reconstructive... (Review)
Review
Postmastectomy immediate breast reconstruction in the U.S. continues to experience an upward trend owing to heightened awareness, innovations in reconstructive technique, growing evidence of improved patient-reported outcomes, and shifts in mastectomy patterns. Women with unilateral breast cancer are increasingly electing to undergo contralateral prophylactic mastectomy, instead of unilateral mastectomy or opting for breast conservation. The ascent in prophylactic surgeries correlates temporally to a shift toward prosthetic methods of reconstruction as the most common technique. Factors associated with the choice for implants include younger age, quicker recovery time, along with documented safety and enhanced aesthetic outcomes with newer generations of devices. Despite advances in autologous transfer, its growth is constrained by the greater technical expertise required to complete microsurgical transfer and potential barriers such as poor relative reimbursement. The increased use of radiation as an adjuvant treatment for management of breast cancer has created additional challenges for plastic surgeons who need to consider the optimal timing and method of breast reconstruction to perform in these patients.
Topics: Adipose Tissue; Breast Implantation; Breast Neoplasms; Female; Humans; Mammaplasty; Radiotherapy; Transplantation, Autologous
PubMed: 29064917
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003941 -
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) Aug 2017Skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies are relatively new conservative surgical approaches to breast cancer. In SSM most of the breast skin is... (Review)
Review
Skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies are relatively new conservative surgical approaches to breast cancer. In SSM most of the breast skin is conserved to create a pocket that facilitates immediate breast reconstruction with implant or autologous graft to achieve a quality cosmetic outcome. NSM is closely similar except that the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is also conserved. Meta-analyses indicate that outcomes for SSM and NSM do not differ from those for non-conservative mastectomies. Recurrence rates in the NAC after NSM are acceptably low (0-3.7%). Other studies indicate that NSM is associated with high patient satisfaction and good psychological adjustment. Indications are carcinoma or DCIS that require mastectomy (including after neoadjuvant chemotherapy). NSM is also suitable for women undergoing risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy. Tumor not less than 2 cm from the NAC is recommended, but may be less important than no evidence of nipple involvement on mandatory intraoperative nipple margin assessment. A positive margin is an absolute contraindication for nipple preservation. Other contraindications are microcalcifications close to the subareolar region and a positive nipple discharge. Complication rates are similar to those for other types of post-mastectomy reconstructions. The main complication of NSM is NAC necrosis, however as surgeon experience matures, frequency declines. Factors associated with complications are voluminous breast, ptosis, smoking, obesity, and radiotherapy. Since the access incision is small, breast tissue may be left behind, so only experienced breast surgeons should do these operations in close collaboration with the plastic surgeon. For breast cancer patients requiring mastectomy, NSM should be the option of choice.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating; Contraindications, Procedure; Female; Humans; Mastectomy; Nipples; Organ Sparing Treatments; Patient Selection; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Skin
PubMed: 28673535
DOI: 10.1016/j.breast.2017.06.034 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2018Recent progress in understanding the genetic basis of breast cancer and widely publicized reports of celebrities undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) have increased... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Recent progress in understanding the genetic basis of breast cancer and widely publicized reports of celebrities undergoing risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) have increased interest in RRM as a method of preventing breast cancer. This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in 2004 and previously updated in 2006 and 2010.
OBJECTIVES
(i) To determine whether risk-reducing mastectomy reduces death rates from any cause in women who have never had breast cancer and in women who have a history of breast cancer in one breast, and (ii) to examine the effect of risk-reducing mastectomy on other endpoints, including breast cancer incidence, breast cancer mortality, disease-free survival, physical morbidity, and psychosocial outcomes.
SEARCH METHODS
For this Review update, we searched Cochrane Breast Cancer's Specialized Register, MEDLINE, Embase and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) on 9 July 2016. We included studies in English.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Participants included women at risk for breast cancer in at least one breast. Interventions included all types of mastectomy performed for the purpose of preventing breast cancer.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently abstracted data from each report. We summarized data descriptively; quantitative meta-analysis was not feasible due to heterogeneity of study designs and insufficient reporting. We analyzed data separately for bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) and contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy (CRRM). Four review authors assessed the methodological quality to determine whether or not the methods used sufficiently minimized selection bias, performance bias, detection bias, and attrition bias.
MAIN RESULTS
All 61 included studies were observational studies with some methodological limitations; randomized trials were absent. The studies presented data on 15,077 women with a wide range of risk factors for breast cancer, who underwent RRM.Twenty-one BRRM studies looking at the incidence of breast cancer or disease-specific mortality, or both, reported reductions after BRRM, particularly for those women with BRCA1/2 mutations. Twenty-six CRRM studies consistently reported reductions in incidence of contralateral breast cancer but were inconsistent about improvements in disease-specific survival. Seven studies attempted to control for multiple differences between intervention groups and showed no overall survival advantage for CRRM. Another study showed significantly improved survival following CRRM, but after adjusting for bilateral risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy (BRRSO), the CRRM effect on all-cause mortality was no longer significant.Twenty studies assessed psychosocial measures; most reported high levels of satisfaction with the decision to have RRM but greater variation in satisfaction with cosmetic results. Worry over breast cancer was significantly reduced after BRRM when compared both to baseline worry levels and to the groups who opted for surveillance rather than BRRM, but there was diminished satisfaction with body image and sexual feelings.Seventeen case series reporting on adverse events from RRM with or without reconstruction reported rates of unanticipated reoperations from 4% in those without reconstruction to 64% in participants with reconstruction.In women who have had cancer in one breast, removing the other breast may reduce the incidence of cancer in that other breast, but there is insufficient evidence that this improves survival because of the continuing risk of recurrence or metastases from the original cancer. Additionally, thought should be given to other options to reduce breast cancer risk, such as BRRSO and chemoprevention, when considering RRM.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
While published observational studies demonstrated that BRRM was effective in reducing both the incidence of, and death from, breast cancer, more rigorous prospective studies are suggested. BRRM should be considered only among those at high risk of disease, for example, BRCA1/2 carriers. CRRM was shown to reduce the incidence of contralateral breast cancer, but there is insufficient evidence that CRRM improves survival, and studies that control for multiple confounding variables are recommended. It is possible that selection bias in terms of healthier, younger women being recommended for or choosing CRRM produces better overall survival numbers for CRRM. Given the number of women who may be over-treated with BRRM/CRRM, it is critical that women and clinicians understand the true risk for each individual woman before considering surgery. Additionally, thought should be given to other options to reduce breast cancer risk, such as BRRSO and chemoprevention when considering RRM.
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Female; Genes, BRCA1; Genes, BRCA2; Genetic Predisposition to Disease; Humans; Observational Studies as Topic; Patient Satisfaction; Postoperative Complications; Prophylactic Mastectomy; Risk Assessment; Unilateral Breast Neoplasms
PubMed: 29620792
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD002748.pub4 -
South Asian Journal of Cancer Oct 2013This is an opinion piece on how a celebrity's personal choice to undergo prophylactic mastectomy on discovery of an aberrant gene, when publicly promoted, carries in...
This is an opinion piece on how a celebrity's personal choice to undergo prophylactic mastectomy on discovery of an aberrant gene, when publicly promoted, carries in itself the power to influence and impact healthcare trends and decisions. When celebrities advocate causes that are universally and uniformly acceptable and indisputable as the best in the realm of healthcare and cure (e.g. no smoking), it creates well-being and awareness in society at large. But those which are personal choices made out of a repertoire of other available and effective options may, because of celebrity preference, don the mantle of a norm. They thus run the danger of being blindly replicated by others without proper awareness and knowledge of the true potential of disease, risk factors, and other existing remedial or risk-reducing measures. Society should thus be encouraged to question, debate, and understand the validity, authenticity, and reason of the choices, especially those with a medical basis. This tempering of information with intelligence and rationale and making informed choices based on facts will serve humanity as a whole.
PubMed: 24455660
DOI: 10.4103/2278-330X.119903 -
Revista Da Associacao Medica Brasileira... Jan 2018
Review
Topics: Breast Neoplasms; Evidence-Based Medicine; Female; Guideline Adherence; Humans; Prophylactic Mastectomy
PubMed: 29561933
DOI: 10.1590/1806-9282.64.01.3 -
Gland Surgery Jan 2021Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates have continued to rise in the United States, impacting all stakeholders including plastic and reconstructive surgeons.... (Review)
Review
Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates have continued to rise in the United States, impacting all stakeholders including plastic and reconstructive surgeons. Multiple factors may be influencing this trend, including patient decision-making characteristics, knowledge about breast cancer disease and prognosis, advances in genetic testing and enhanced imaging capabilities, sociodemographic factors, and access to specialty surgical services such as breast reconstruction. In this review, the authors shed light on the current state of CPM and summarize the literature analyzing its increasing prevalence in the United States, as well as outline future directions for study and dissemination of knowledge from providers to patients surrounding this important and complex treatment decision.
PubMed: 33634008
DOI: 10.21037/gs.2020.03.15 -
The Surgical Clinics of North America Dec 2021Breast surgical oncology is a rapidly evolving field with significant advances shaped by practice-changing research. Three areas of ongoing controversy are (1) high... (Review)
Review
Breast surgical oncology is a rapidly evolving field with significant advances shaped by practice-changing research. Three areas of ongoing controversy are (1) high rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) in the United States despite uncertain benefit, (2) indications for and use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) and endocrine therapy (NET), and (3) staging and treatment of the axilla, particularly after neoadjuvant systemic therapy. We discuss the patient populations for whom CPM may or may not be beneficial, indications for NACT and NET, and the trend toward de-escalation of locoregional axillary treatment.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal; Axilla; Breast Neoplasms; Combined Modality Therapy; Female; Humans; Lymph Node Excision; Mammaplasty; Mastectomy; Neoadjuvant Therapy; Neoplasm Staging; Prophylactic Mastectomy
PubMed: 34774266
DOI: 10.1016/j.suc.2021.06.002