Oncological safety and cosmetic outcomes in oncoplastic breast conservation surgery, a review of the best level of evidence literature.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Campbell EJ
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5552002 | biostudies-other | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDiagnoses of multiple ipsilateral breast cancer (MIBC) are increasing. Historically, the primary treatment for MIBC has been mastectomy due to concerns about in-breast recurrence risk and poor cosmetic outcome. The Alliance Z11102 study prospectively assessed cosmetic outcomes in women with MIBC treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT).Patients and methodsZ11102 was a multicenter trial enrolling women with two or three separate sites of biopsy-proven malignancy separated by ≥ 2 cm within the same breast. Cosmetic outcome was a planned secondary endpoint. Data were collected with a four-point cosmesis survey (1 = excellent, 4 = poor) and the BREAST-Q (scored 0-100). All patients undergoing successful breast-conserving therapy were treated with whole-breast radiation. Associations were assessed with Chi square or Fisher's exact tests as appropriate.ResultsCosmetic outcome data for 216 eligible women who completed therapy are included in this analysis. Of the 136 patients who completed the survey 2 years postoperatively, 70.6% (N = 96) felt the result was good or excellent, while 3.7% (N = 5) felt the result was poor. We found no significant differences in patient-reported cosmetic outcomes when stratifying by patient age, number of lesions (two or three), number of incisions, number of lumpectomies, or size of largest area of disease. Mean satisfaction score on the BREAST-Q was 77.2 at 6 months following whole-breast radiation and 73.7 at 3 years following surgery.ConclusionsBCT performed for MIBC results in good or excellent cosmesis for the majority of women. From a cosmetic perspective, BCT is a valid surgical approach to women with MIBC.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01556243.
| S-EPMC7554157 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objective: To evaluate the safety and oncological outcomes of laparoscopic colorectal surgery using natural orifice specimen extraction (NOSE) compared with conventional laparoscopic (CL) colorectal surgery in patients with colorectal diseases. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective non-randomized trials and retrospective trials up to September 1, 2018, and used 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), lymph node harvest, surgical site infection (SSI), anastomotic leakage, and intra-abdominal abscess as the main endpoints. Subgroup analyses were conducted according to the different study types [RCT and NRCT (non-randomized controlled trial)]. A sensitivity analysis was carried out to evaluate the reliability of the outcomes. RevMan5.3 software was used for statistical analysis. Results: Fourteen studies were included (two RCTs, seven retrospective trials and five prospective non-randomized trials) involving a total of 1,435 patients. Compared with CL surgery, the NOSE technique resulted in a shorter hospital stay, shorter time to first flatus, less post-operative pain, and fewer SSIs and total perioperative complications. Anastomotic leakage, blood loss, and intra-abdominal abscess did not differ between the two groups, while operation time was longer in the NOSE group. Oncological outcomes such as proximal margin [weighted mean difference [WMD] = 0.47; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.49 to 1.42; P = 0.34], distal margin (WMD= -0.11; 95% CI -0.66 to 0.45; P = 0.70), lymph node harvest (WMD = -0.97; 95% CI -1.97 to 0.03; P = 0.06) and 5-year DFS (hazard ratio = 0.84; 95% CI 0.54-1.31; P = 0.45) were not different between the NOSE and CL surgery groups. Conclusions: Compared with CL surgery, NOSE may be a safe procedure, and can achieve similar oncological outcomes. Large multicenter RCTs are needed to provide high-level, evidence-based results in NOSE-treated patients and to determine the risk of local recurrence.
| S-EPMC6617713 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFree dermal fat grafts (FDFG) are used for immediate breast defect repair in breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and have achieved satisfactory immediate postoperative cosmetic effects (Sawai et al., 2004) [1]. However, the oncologic safety and long-term cosmetic outcomes of these surgical procedures remain unknown. Therefore, t，in this study, we aim to investigate the oncological safety and long-term cosmetic outcomes of FDFG in patients with breast cancer.MethodsThis matched retrospective case-control study included patients with non-special types of breast cancer who underwent FDFG for breast defect repair after BCS or BCS alone at two breast cancer research centers in Guangxi Province, China, from January 2016 to December 2019. The patients were divided into either the FDFG or BCS group. Control cases were screened using propensity score matching, and survival analysis and cosmetic evaluations were performed.ResultsA total of 442 patients with breast cancer were included in the study. After 1:4 propensity score matching, 53 and 212 patients were included in the FDFG and BCS groups, respectively. The median follow-up time was 49.9 (9.0-76.0) months. The rate of local recurrence in the FDFG group (9.4 %) was significantly higher than that in the BCS group (1.9 %; p < 0.05). The total cosmetic evaluation score was significantly higher in the BCS group 18 months after surgery than in the FDFG group (p < 0.05).ConclusionsIn this retrospective study, FDFG was significantly associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. Further prospective studies are required to confirm these results. No significant difference in long-term cosmetic effects were observed for FDFG than for BCS alone for immediate breast defect repair.
| S-EPMC10788852 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionOncoplastic breast surgery allows the excision of larger tumours without compromising cosmetic outcome and can be broadly divided into volume displacement and volume replacement techniques. Although oncoplastic surgery has rapidly gained acceptance and is now widely practised, evidence is still lacking especially in patients who underwent volume replacement techniques. As it is a relatively new technique that has been described in the literature in the recent years, a summary of evidence from this literature can help clinicians to understand the clinical, oncologicalandcosmetic outcomes of such procedures.Methods and analysisAll original studies including randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies and case series involving more than 10 women undergoing partial breast reconstruction using a volume replacement technique will be included. The primary objective is to evaluate the clinical, oncological and cosmetic outcomes following volume replacement in patients undergoing oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery. The secondary objective is to review the patient-reported outcomes (PROMs) associated with oncoplastic breast surgery to help identify any unmet needs and to consider refining the existing PROMs to suit women undergoing volume replacement surgery.A comprehensive literature search, eligibility assessment and extraction of data will be conducted by two trained teams acting independently. Data will be extracted and stored in a database with standardised extraction fields to facilitate easy and consistent data entry. Heterogeneity will be assessed using the Cochrane tests.Ethics and disseminationThis systematic review requires no ethical approval. It will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, and it will also be presented at nationalandinternational conferences.Prospero registration numberCRD42017075700; Pre-results.
| S-EPMC6059305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Biometry has become one of the most important steps in modern cataract surgery and, according to the Royal College of Ophthalmologists Cataract Surgery Guidelines, what matters most is achieving excellent results. This paper is aimed at the NHS cataract surgeon and intends to be a critical review of the recent literature on biometry for cataract surgery, summarising the evidence for current best practice standards and available practical strategies for improving outcomes for patients. With modern optical biometry for the majority of patients, informed formula choice and intraocular lens (IOL) constant optimisation outcomes of more than 90% within ± 1 D and more than 60% within ± 0.5 D of target are achievable. There are a number of strategies available to surgeons wishing to exceed these outcomes, the most promising of which are the use of strict-tolerance IOLs and second eye prediction refinement.
| S-EPMC3930261 | biostudies-other
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of the present study was to determine which of the umbilical entry routes for intraperitoneal access has a better cosmetic result.Material and methodsThis was a prospective study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1). In total, 105 patients who underwent laparoscopic surgery were included. A vertical or transverse umbilical incision is appropriately made for the trocar to be inserted, and an infraumbilical, supraumbilical, or transumbilical route was preferred for initial intraperitoneal access. Demographic data of patients, body mass indices, entry point of the trocars (infraumbilical-transumbilical-supraumbilical), type of incision (vertical-transverse), duration of the operation, and scar properties at postoperative week 12 were prospectively collected and analyzed. The Vancouver scar scale was used to evaluate the cosmetic results.ResultsCosmetic results did not differ statistically between the transumbilical-infraumbilical-supraumbilical groups. The variables, such as vascularity, height, and total score, of the Vancouver scar scale were significantly higher in patients who had transverse incisions. There was no statistically significant effect of using a Veress needle with the cosmetic results. There was no statistically significant correlation between age, gravida, body mass indices, skin thickness, time of entry, duration of the operation, and cosmetic results in terms of vascularity, height, and total score.ConclusionDuring laparoscopic surgery, each patient should be assessed individually for the satisfaction of the patient and, thereby, of the surgeon in terms of cosmetic outcomes. Vertical incision offers superior cosmetic effects than transverse incision. Further research is required to define long-term scar-related outcomes of the laparoscopic intraperitoneal access techniques.
| S-EPMC6340657 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThyroid carcinoma (TC) is more likely to occur in young women. The aim of this study was to compare the aesthetic effect of different thyroidectomies.MethodsOne hundred twenty female patients who underwent thyroidectomy were evenly distributed into three groups: conventional access (CA), aesthetic principles access (APA) and minimally invasive access (MIA). The Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS) was used as the assessment tool for the linear scar.ResultsThe patients in the MIA group showed significantly less intraoperative blood loss, less drainage, a shorter scar length and a shorter duration of drainage than those in the CA group and the APA group. However, the operation time of 129.0 min in the MIA group was significantly longer than the 79.6 min in the CA group and the 77.0 min in the APA group. The best aesthetic score, as assessed by the Observer Scar Assessment Scale (OSAS), was obtained in the APA group. The Patient Scar Assessment Scale (PSAS) scores were significantly lower in the APA group and CA group than in the MIA group. Significantly lower objective scar ratings were found in the APA group than in the other two groups.ConclusionThese results show that APA produced the best surgical outcomes in TC patients, indicating that conventional thyroidectomy can produce an ideal aesthetic result using the principles of aesthetic surgery. Thyroid surgery need not be performed through excessively short incisions for the sake of patient satisfaction with the scar's appearance.Trial registrationThis clinical trial was retrospectively registered on ClinicalTrials.gov PRS on August 1st,2017 ( NCT03239769 ).
| S-EPMC5604280 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe financial principles of a no-cost revision policy and their implications for revision rates are not well understood.ObjectivesTherefore, the primary objective of this retrospective study is to report our no-cost revision rates and, secondarily, to survey the cosmetic revision policies of other cosmetic surgery practices and detail the financial principles underpinning no-cost revisions.MethodsAll aesthetic surgeries and no-cost revisions performed by the plastic surgeons, oculoplastic surgeons, and facial plastic and reconstructive surgeons at our academic outpatient cosmetic surgery center from January 1, 2016 to June 30, 2022 were identified using procedural codes. Data on the number of surgeries, number of revisions, operative minutes, and time intervals between initial and revision surgeries were collected. A survey was administered to assess the revision policies of similar cosmetic surgery practices.ResultsA total of 1491 aesthetic surgeries and minimally invasive procedures were included, and 125 revision procedures were performed (8.4%). Thigh lifts (3, 13.6%), rhinoplasties or septoplasties (25, 15.8%), and otoplasties (3, 27.3%) had the highest revision rates. Three practices (15%) offered cosmetic revisions at no cost, 9 (45%) did not apply a surgeon's fee, 5 (25%) evaluated fees on a case-by-case basis, 1 (5%) offered revisions with an insurance policy, and 2 (10%) cosmetic surgery practices did not offer revisions at a reduced rate.ConclusionsDespite offering revisions at no cost, our revision rates are reasonable for an academic cosmetic surgery practice. The revision policies offered to patients on the private market are varied, but most surveyed practices offer revisions at either a reduced rate or no cost.Level of evidence 4
| S-EPMC10111429 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundFertility-sparing surgery (FSS) has been widely used for patients with early-stage mucinous ovarian carcinoma (MOC). However, there is limited evidence regarding the reproductive outcomes as well as the impact of growth pattern on oncological outcomes after FSS. This study aims to evaluate the oncological and reproductive outcomes of patients with stage I primary MOC after FSS.MethodsThis retrospective study enrolled 159 women with histologically confirmed unilateral stage I MOC treated at Peking Union Medical College Hospital between 1997 and 2019. Sixty-seven cases were pathologically reviewed for the growth pattern. Seventy-eight patients had FSS, defined as conservation of the uterus and at least part of one ovary, while 81 underwent radical surgery (RS). Oncofertility outcomes were compared between the groups and clinicopathological factors associated with disease-free survival (DFS) were analyzed by univariate and multivariate analyses. Patients in the FSS group were contacted to collect data on reproductive outcomes.ResultsEighteen patients developed recurrent disease during a median follow-up of 69 months, including 12 in the FSS and six in the RS group. There was one death each in the FSS and RS groups. There was no significant difference in DFS between the groups. CA125 >35 U/ml, stage IC, and incomplete staging were correlated with worse DFS according to multivariate analysis (P=0.001; 0.020 (stage IC) and 0.004 (incomplete staging) respectively). There was no significant difference in DFS between patients with stage IA and stage IC1 in the FSS group, while DFS was poorer in patients with stage IC2/3 than stage IA (P=0.028). In addition, DFS was significantly poorer in patients who underwent unilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (USO) compared with those receiving USO plus staging surgery (P=0.015). There was a tendency towards poorer DFS in the infiltrative tumors compared with the expansile tumors (P=0.056). Of 23 patients who attempted to conceive, 21 (91.3%) achieved 27 pregnancies, including 26 spontaneous pregnancies and one following assisted reproductive technology. Twenty patients gave birth to 24 healthy babies, including 21 full-term and three premature births. The live-birth rate was 88.9%.ConclusionsFSS is a suitable option for young women with unilateral stage I expansile MOC, with acceptable oncological outcomes and meaningful pregnancy rates. Re-staging should be proposed in patients who undergo incomplete staging surgery.
| S-EPMC9289154 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We review the safety and early oncological outcomes of irreversible electroporation (IRE), a novel non-thermal ablation technique, in small renal masses (SRMs). Following PROSPERO registration (CRD42020197943), a systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and SCOPUS databases according to PRISMA guidelines was performed. Critical appraisal of the included studies was performed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Of 224 articles screened, 10 met the inclusion criteria. In total, 83 patients were identified. Except for one cohort study (n = 41), the remaining studies were case series of n < 10. Follow up was <12 months in 7/10 articles (range 3-34 months). About 10/10 articles reported safety outcomes. There were no 30-day mortalities. The most frequently reported adverse events were transient haematuria (11/83) and asymptomatic perirenal haematomas (7/83). About 62/63 patients with reported length of stay were discharged within 24 h. No significant long-term changes in renal function were reported. About 7/10 articles reported oncological outcomes. Only one article assessed histopathological outcomes, whilst the remaining studies used cross-sectional imaging modalities to assess efficacy, recurrence or disease progression. About 4/7 patients with histopathology outcomes, showed complete response (CR). About 43/55 patients with radiological outcomes showed CR. No mortalities were reported due to SRMs. These initial findings support IRE as safe and feasible in managing SRMs. However, results from larger studies with longer follow-up are needed to evaluate oncological outcomes and compare these with other ablation methods.
| S-EPMC9310143 | biostudies-literature