Dataset Information

Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing versus skin-sparing mastectomy.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The use of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasing, despite unproven oncological safety in the therapeutic setting. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the safety and efficacy of NSM compared with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM).

Methods

A literature search of all original studies including RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies comparing women undergoing therapeutic NSM or SSM for breast cancer was undertaken. Primary outcomes were oncological outcomes; secondary outcomes were clinical, aesthetic, patient-reported and quality-of-life outcomes. Data analysis was undertaken to explore the relationship between NSM and SSM, and preselected outcomes. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Cochrane tests.

Results

A total of 690 articles were identified, of which 14 were included. There was no statistically significant difference in 5-year disease-free survival and mortality for NSM and SSM groups, where data were available. Local recurrence rates were also similar for NSM and SSM (3·9 versus 3·3 per cent respectively; P?=?0·45). NSM had a partial or complete nipple necrosis rate of 15·0 per cent, and a higher complication rate than SSM (22·6 versus 14·0 per cent respectively). The higher overall complication rate was due to the rate of nipple necrosis in the NSM group (15·0 per cent).

Conclusion

In carefully selected cases, NSM is a viable choice for women with breast cancer who need to have a mastectomy. More research is needed to help further refine which surgical approaches to NSM optimize outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Agha RA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6433323 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Systematic review of therapeutic nipple-sparing <i>versus</i> skin-sparing mastectomy.

Agha R A RA Al Omran Y Y Wellstead G G Sagoo H H Barai I I Rajmohan S S Borrelli M R MR Vella-Baldacchino M M Orgill D P DP Rusby J E JE

BJS open 20181219 2

<h4>Background</h4>The use of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasing, despite unproven oncological safety in the therapeutic setting. The aim of this systematic review was to determine the safety and efficacy of NSM compared with skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM).<h4>Methods</h4>A literature search of all original studies including RCTs, cohort studies and case-control studies comparing women undergoing therapeutic NSM or SSM for breast cancer was undertaken. Primary outcomes were oncological ...[more]

PMID: 30957059

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe emphasis on aesthetic outcomes and quality of life (QoL) has motivated surgeons to develop skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy (SSM/ NSM) for breast cancer treatment or prevention. During the same operation, a so-called immediate breast reconstruction is performed. The breast can be reconstructed by positioning of a breast implant above (prepectoral) or below (subpectoral) the pectoralis major muscle or by using the patients' own tissue (autologous reconstruction). The optimal positioning of the implant prepectoral or subpectoral is currently not clear. Subpectoral implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) is still standard care in many countries, but prepectoral IBBR is increasingly performed. This heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice is calling for randomised clinical trials (RCTs) to guide treatment decisions.Methods and analysisInternational, pragmatic, multicentre, randomised, superiority trial. The primary objective of this trial is to test whether prepectoral IBBR provides better QoL with respect to long-term (24 months) physical well-being (chest) compared with subpectoral IBBR for patients undergoing SSM or NSM for prevention or treatment of breast cancer. Secondary objectives will compare prepectoral versus subpectoral IBBR in terms of safety, QoL and patient satisfaction, aesthetic outcomes and burden on patients. Total number of patients to be included: 372 (186 per arm).Ethics and disseminationThis study will be conducted in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Ethical approval has been obtained for the lead investigator's site by the Ethics Committee 'Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz' (2020-00256, 26 March 2020). The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed medical journal, independent of the results, following the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials standards for RCTs and good publication practice. Metadata describing the type, size and content of the datasets will be shared along with the study protocol and case report forms on public repositories adhering to the FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability, and Reuse) principles.Trial registration numberNCT04293146.