Retrospective, Multicenter Analysis Comparing Conventional with Oncoplastic Breast Conserving Surgery: Oncological and Surgical Outcomes in Women with High-Risk Breast Cancer from the OPBC-01/iTOP2 Study.

INTRODUCTION: Recent data suggest that margins ≥2 mm after breast-conserving surgery may improve local control in invasive breast cancer (BC). By allowing large resection volumes, oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (OBCII; Clough level II/Tübingen 5-6) may achieve better local control than conventional breast conserving surgery (BCS; Tübingen 1-2) or oncoplastic breast conservation with low resection volumes (OBCI; Clough level I/Tübingen 3-4). METHODS: Data from consecutive high-risk BC patients treated in 15 centers from the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium (OPBC) network, between January 2010 and December 2013, were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 3,177 women were included, 30% of whom were treated with OBC (OBCI n = 663; OBCII n = 297). The BCS/OBCI group had significantly smaller tumors and smaller resection margins compared with OBCII (pT1: 50% vs. 37%, p = 0.002; proportion with margin <1 mm: 17% vs. 6%, p < 0.001). There were significantly more re-excisions due to R1 ("ink on tumor") in the BCS/OBCI compared with the OBCII group (11% vs. 7%, p = 0.049). Univariate and multivariable regression analysis adjusted for tumor biology, tumor size, radiotherapy, and systemic treatment demonstrated no differences in local, regional, or distant recurrence-free or overall survival between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Large resection volumes in oncoplastic surgery increases the distance from cancer cells to the margin of the specimen and reduces reexcision rates significantly. With OBCII larger tumors are resected with similar local, regional and distant recurrence-free as well as overall survival rates as BCS/OBCI.

Patient Satisfaction, Esthetic Outcome, and Quality of Life in Oncoplastic and Reconstructive Breast Surgery: A Single Center Experience.

Background: Oncoplastic surgery has become an important part of the surgical repertoire to offer both oncologically safe and aesthetically pleasing results in patients with breast cancer. Data comparing oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeries are limited. This study aimed to assess patient-reported outcomes (PRO) in our cohort of oncoplastic and reconstructively operated patients. Methods: Patients who underwent oncoplastic surgery, including immediate reconstruction by a single surgeon, between 2010 and 2018 were contacted to participate in this study. In total, 157 patients fulfilled the inclusion criteria. 54 patient data sets were used for statistical evaluation. Body Image Scale (BIS) and BreastQ questionnaires were used to measure subjective PRO scores, and pictures were taken to objectively measure symmetry using the Breast Analyzing Tool (BAT). Patients were divided into three groups according to the Tübingen classification (group 1: Tübingen 3-4 (n = 16), group 2: Tübingen 5 (n = 26), group 3: Breast Reconstruction/Tübingen 6 (n = 12]). Results: The mean age was 53.5 for group 1, 51.4 for group 2 and 46.8 for group 3. The mean follow-up was 62.9 ± 35.82 months. BIS was significantly better in group 3 (3.92 ± 1.73) than in group 1 and 2 (7.69 ± 4.48 and 4.81 ± 3.41, p = 0.016). Symmetry measured using BAT showed only a trend favoring reconstruction (p = 0.12). The BreastQ item "Sexual well-being" was significantly better in oncoplastic breast reduction surgery (p = 0.036). Conclusion: BIS was better after reconstructive breast surgery than after oncoplastic surgery. Reconstructive breast surgery in experienced breast care units offers high patient satisfaction and a high quality of life.