A multidisciplinary view of mastectomy and breast reconstruction: Understanding the challenges.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Kaidar-Person O
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7905468 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Feb
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A multidisciplinary view of mastectomy and breast reconstruction: Understanding the challenges.
Kaidar-Person Orit O Offersen Birgitte V BV Boersma Liesbeth J LJ de Ruysscher Dirk D Tramm Trine T Kühn Thorsten T Gentilini Oreste O Mátrai Zoltán Z Poortmans Philip P
Breast (Edinburgh, Scotland) 20210210
The current review paper was written in collaboration with breast cancer surgeons from the European Breast Cancer Research Association of Surgical Trialists (EUBREAST), a breast pathologist from the Danish Breast Cancer Group (DBCG), and representatives from the European SocieTy for Radiotherapy & Oncology (ESTRO) breast cancer course. Herein we summarize the different mastectomies and reconstruction procedures and define high-risk anatomical areas for breast cancer recurrences, to further speci ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Breast cancer is the leading cause of cancer death in women worldwide. Its surgical approach has become less and less mutilating in the last decades. However, the overall number of breast reconstructions has significantly increased lately. Nowadays, breast reconstruction should be individualized at its best, first of all taking into consideration not only the oncological aspects of the tumor, neo-/adjuvant treatment, and genetic predisposition, but also its timing (immediate versus delayed breast reconstruction), as well as the patient's condition and wish. This article gives an overview over the various possibilities of breast reconstruction, including implant- and expander-based reconstruction, flap-based reconstruction (vascularized autologous tissue), the combination of implant and flap, reconstruction using non-vascularized autologous fat, as well as refinement surgery after breast reconstruction.
| S-EPMC4717291 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeThe goal of this study was to explore the perspectives and practice of radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients who have had breast reconstruction.MethodsIn 2010, an original electronic survey was sent to all physician members of the American Society of Radiation Oncology, National Cancer Research Institute-Breast Cancer Studies Group in the United Kingdom, Thai Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, Swiss Society of Radiation Oncology, and Turkish Radiation Oncology Society. We identified factors associated with radiation oncologists who treat breast cancer patients with reconstruction performed prior to radiation and obtained information regarding radiation management of the breast reconstruction.Results358 radiation oncologists responded, and 60% of the physicians were from the United States. While 64% of participants agree or strongly agree that breast image affects a woman's quality of life during radiation, 57% feel that reconstruction challenges their ability to deliver effective breast radiation. Compared with other countries, treatment within the United States was associated with a high reconstruction rate (>/= 50% of mastectomy patients) prior to radiation (p < 0.05). Delayed-immediate reconstruction with a temporary tissue expander was more common in the United States than in other countries (52% vs. 23%, p = 0.01). Among physicians who treat patients with tissue expanders, the majority (60%) prefer a moderately inflated implant with 150-250 cc of fluid rather than a completely deflated (13%) or inflated expander (28%) during radiation. Among radiation oncologists who treat reconstructions, 49% never use bolus and 40% never boost a breast reconstruction. United States physicians were more likely than physicians from other countries to boost or bolus the reconstruction irrespective of the type of reconstruction seen in their clinic patients (p < 0.01).ConclusionsGreat variation in practice is evident from our study of radiation treatment for breast cancer patients with reconstruction. Further research on the impact and delivery of radiation to a reconstructed breast may validate some of the observed practices, highlight the variability in treatment practice, and help create a treatment consensus.
| S-EPMC3599934 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWomen undergoing autologous reconstruction (AR) after mastectomy for breast cancer and their surgeons must make decisions regarding timing of the AR and choose among various flap types. We conducted a systematic review to evaluate the comparative benefits and harms of (1) timing of AR relative to chemotherapy and radiation therapy, and (2) various flap types for AR.MethodsWe searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane CENTRAL, CINAHL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies, from inception to March 23, 2021, without language restriction. We assessed risk of bias of individual studies and strength of evidence (SoE) of our findings using standard methods.ResultsWe screened 15,936 citations. Twelve mostly high risk of bias studies, including three randomized controlled trials and nine nonrandomized comparative studies met criteria (total N = 31,833 patients). No studies addressed timing of AR relative to chemotherapy or radiation therapy. Six flap types were compared, but conclusions were feasible for only the comparison between transverse rectus abdominus myocutaneous (TRAM) and deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flaps. The choice of either flap may result in comparable patient satisfaction with breasts and comparable risk of necrosis (low SoE for both outcomes), but TRAM flaps probably pose a greater risk of harm to the area of flap harvest (abdominal bulge/hernia and need for surgical repair) (moderate SoE).ConclusionsEvidence regarding details for AR is mostly of low SoE. New high-quality research among diverse populations of women is needed for the issue of timing of AR and for comparisons among flap types.
| S-EPMC8920301 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeThe aim of the study is to evaluate the level of sensible impairment after mastectomy or implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR). In addition, factors influencing breast sensibility were evaluated.MethodsA cross-sectional study was performed in Maastricht University Medical Center between July 2016 and August 2018. Women with unilateral mastectomy with or without IBBR were included. Objective sensory measurements were performed using Semmes-Weinstein monofilaments. Their healthy breast served as control, using a paired t test. Differences between mastectomy with and without IBBR were evaluated using the independent t test. Linear regression was performed to evaluate the association between patient characteristics on breast sensibility. The paired t test was used to evaluate in which part of the breast the sensibility is best preserved.ResultsFifty-one patients were eligible for inclusion. Sixteen patients underwent IBBR after mastectomy. Twenty-three patients received radiotherapy and 35 patients received chemotherapy. Monofilament values were significantly higher in the operated group compared to the reference group (p?<?0.001). Linear regression showed a statistically significant association between IBBR and objectively measured impaired sensation (p?=?0.008). After mastectomy, the cutaneous protective sensation is only diminished. After IBBR, it is lost in the majority of the breast. The medial part of the breast was significantly more sensitive than the lateral part in all operated breasts (p?<?0.001).ConclusionIBBR has a significantly negative impact on the breast sensibility compared to mastectomy alone. This study shows that the protective sensation of the skin in the breast is lost after IBBR. To our knowledge, this is the first study to evaluate the level of sensible impairment after mastectomy or IBBR. More research is necessary to confirm these results.
| S-EPMC6533215 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceBreast reconstruction has the potential to improve a person's body image and quality of life but has important risks. Variations in who undergoes breast reconstruction have led to questions about the quality of patient decisions.ObjectiveTo assess the quality of patient decisions about breast reconstruction.Design, setting, and participantsA prospective, cross-sectional survey study was conducted from June 27, 2012, to February 28, 2014, at a single, academic, multidisciplinary oncology clinic among women planning to undergo mastectomy for stage I to III invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, or prophylaxis.ExposuresMastectomy only and mastectomy with reconstruction.Main outcome and measuresKnowledge, as ascertained using the Decision Quality Instrument; preference concordance, based on rating and ranking of key attributes; and decision quality, defined as having knowledge of 50% or more and preference concordance.ResultsDuring the 20-month period, 214 patients were eligible, 182 were approached, and 32 missed. We enrolled 145 patients (79.7% enrollment rate), and received surveys from 131 patients (72.0% participation rate). Five participants became ineligible. The final study population was 126 patients. Among the 126 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 53.2 [12.1] years), the mean (SD) knowledge score was 58.5% (16.2%) and did not differ by treatment group (mastectomy only, 55.2% [15.0%]; mastectomy with reconstruction, 60.5% [16.5%]). A total of 82 of 123 participants (66.7%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy only; 39 of these women (47.6%) underwent mastectomy only. A total of 41 participants (32.5%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy with reconstruction; 36 of these women (87.8%) underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. Overall, 52 of 120 participants (43.3%) made a high-quality decision. In multivariable analysis, white race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.72; 95% CI, 1.00-7.38; P = .05), having private insurance (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.93; P < .001), having a high school education or less (vs some college) (OR, 4.84; 95% CI, 1.22-19.21; P = .02), having a college degree (vs some college) (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.53-2.49; P < .001), and not having a malignant neoplasm (eg, BRCA carriers) (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.25-7.85; P = .01) were independently associated with making a high-quality decision.Conclusions and relevanceA minority of patients undergoing mastectomy in a single academic center made a high-quality decision about reconstruction. Shared decision making is needed to support decisions about breast reconstruction.
| S-EPMC5559314 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectives: Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women. The immunohistochemical profile, but also the stage of the tumor determines the therapeutic management, which varies from conservative surgery to mastectomy associated with chemotherapy, hormonal and biological therapy and/or radiotherapy. Mastectomy remains one of the most radical surgical intervention for women, having great consequences on quality of life, which can be improved by realizing immediate or delayed breast reconstruction. The objective of the study was to evaluate the period of time between the mastectomy and the breast reconstruction. Material and methods: We performed a retrospective study on 57 female patients admitted to the Plastic Surgery Department of the Clinical Emergency Hospital "Prof. Dr. Agrippa Ionescu", Bucharest, Romania. All the patients underwent immediate or delayed breast reconstruction after mastectomy for confirmed breast cancer. Descriptive data analysis was realized with evaluation of type of breast reconstruction considering the staging of the tumor, the invaded lymph nodes, and the necessity of adjuvant chemoradiotherapy. Moreover, the median period between mastectomy and reconstruction was evaluated. Results: The immediate breast reconstruction was performed in patients with stage I, in patients with stage II, delayed reconstruction was performed after minimum six months, and the patients with stage III had the breast reconstructed with free flap (50%), 8-43 months post-mastectomy. Radiotherapy determines the type of breast reconstruction, in most of the cases the latissimus dorsi flap was used with implant (22.6%). Conclusions: Breast reconstruction is an important step in increasing the quality of life for women who underwent mastectomy after breast cancer. The proper timing for breast reconstruction must be settled by a team formed by the patient, the plastic surgeon, and the oncologist.
| S-EPMC7073902 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11336796 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Risk-reducing mastectomy (RRM) is often advocated for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who face a heightened lifetime risk of breast cancer. However, many carrier patients seek alternative risk-reducing measures. In a phase II nonrandomized trial, we previously reported that prophylactic irradiation to the contralateral breast among BRCA carriers undergoing breast-conserving treatment significantly reduced subsequent contralateral breast cancer. Herein, we report the outcome of salvage mastectomy and reconstruction in 11 patients that suffered reoccurrences of breast cancer in either the ipsilateral or contralateral breast or elected to have the procedure for risk reduction during the eight-year follow-up period. Patients' satisfaction with the procedure and physicians' assessment of the cosmetic outcome were not inferior for previously irradiated compared to non-irradiated breasts. Although the numbers are small, the results are encouraging and sustain hope in a challenging population. Our findings support continuing research as well as a discussion of risk-reduction alternatives besides mastectomy, including prophylactic breast irradiation, in BRCA1/2 mutation carriers.
| S-EPMC8198915 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveBreast reconstruction in patients with obesity presents numerous challenges, both in terms of surgical technique and post-operative complication management. As breast reconstruction techniques continue to evolve, the armamentarium of reconstructive options for patients with obesity has vastly expanded. Options now include immediate or delayed, implant-based, autologous, or hybrid reconstruction. Determining the optimal breast reconstruction in this complex population requires nuanced and experienced decision-making.MethodsA literature search was conducted to identify studies assessing breast reconstruction considerations in patients with obesity. The search was performed on PubMed and was limited to English language studies published between 1990 and 2023. Primary studies, case reports, chart reviews, and qualitative studies were included. Additional articles were identified for inclusion based on a review of references, as well as a web-based search, to identify additional studies that were not captured with the primary search strategy.Key content and findingsThis narrative review article summarizes the current literature available to guide surgeons in breast reconstruction in patients with obesity.ConclusionsThe advancements in oncologic surgery and breast reconstruction techniques have expanded available surgical options, including immediate or delayed implant-based, autologous, or hybrid breast reconstruction. Each approach has its unique advantages, disadvantages, and surgical considerations. Despite the challenges, patients with obesity can achieve favorable aesthetic outcomes through careful assessment of comorbidities and expectation management.
| S-EPMC10777214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To evaluate complications after postmastectomy breast reconstruction, particularly in the setting of adjuvant radiotherapy.Most studies of complications after breast reconstruction have been conducted at centers of excellence; relatively little is known about complication rates in irradiated patients treated in the broader community. This information is relevant for decision making in patients with breast cancer.Using the claims-based MarketScan database, we described complications in 14,894 women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer from 1998 to 2007 and who underwent immediate autologous reconstruction (n = 2637), immediate implant-based reconstruction (n = 3007), or no reconstruction within the first 2 postoperative years (n = 9250). We used a generalized estimating equation to evaluate associations between complications and radiotherapy over time.Wound complications were diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 2.3% of patients without reconstruction, 4.4% patients with implants, and 9.5% patients with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). Infection was diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 12.7% of patients without reconstruction, 20.5% with implants, and 20.7% with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). A total of 5219 (35%) women received radiation. Radiation was not associated with infection in any surgical group within the first 6 months but was associated with an increased risk of infection in months 7 to 24 in all 3 groups (each P < 0.001). In months 7 to 24, radiation was associated with higher odds of implant removal in patients with implant reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.48; P < 0.001) and fat necrosis in those with autologous reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.55; P = 0.01).Complication risks after immediate breast reconstruction differ by approach. Radiation therapy seems to modestly increase certain risks, including infection and implant removal.
| S-EPMC4824182 | biostudies-literature