An Oncoplastic Surgery Primer: Common Indications, Techniques, and Complications in Level 1 and 2 Volume Displacement Oncoplastic Surgery.

Oncoplastic surgery is a form of breast-conservation surgery that involves volume displacement and replacement techniques for optimal aesthetic results after oncologic resection with partial mastectomy. With growing emphasis on breast conservation, oncoplastic surgery is becoming a critical component in the approach to breast cancer in appropriately selected patients. Thus, it is paramount that surgeons are informed about oncoplastic surgery and its use in breast cancer treatment. This primer aims to provide key information regarding oncoplastic surgery. To accomplish this, we used supportive evidence from the literature, combined with clinical experience. The primer uses the American Society of Breast Surgeon's consensus definition and classification system for oncoplastic surgery, focusing on level 1 and 2 volume displacement techniques. We outline procedures within these categories, review common indications, and provide a guide to approaching tumors based on their quadrant position. The paper also describes complications specific to these procedures, as well as their management. Understanding these concepts will allow surgeons to assist patients in making informed decisions using these breast-conservation techniques.

Poor Access to Breast Reconstruction: A Geographical Shortage of Plastic Surgeons Relative to Breast Surgeons in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer surgery involves removal of cancer performed by a breast surgeon and reconstruction performed by a plastic surgeon. Historically, many women have not undergone breast reconstruction surgery (BRS), with current literature suggesting that geographic barriers may play a role. Our objective was to determine if there is a geographic shortage of plastic surgeons in the United States and to assess for trends in access to BRS for rural, suburban, and urban populations. METHODS: A database investigation of the 2018 membership for the American Society of Breast Surgeons and the American Society of Plastic Surgeons was performed. We searched for a breast surgeon's geographic presence by zip code and looked for the presence of a plastic surgeon within 10 and 20 miles. Zip codes were then categorized as urban, suburban, or rural. Within each population category, the average numbers of breast surgeons and plastic surgeons were quantified. RESULTS: Twenty-five percent of breast surgeon zip codes had no plastic surgeons located within 10 miles; 10% of breast surgeon zip codes had no plastic surgeon within 20 miles. There were on average 7.03 breast surgeons in each urbanized area. Suburban and rural areas had an average of 1.14 and 1.00 breast surgeons, respectively. There were on average 10.97 plastic surgeons per urbanized area. Suburban and rural areas had, on average, 0.23 and 0.06 plastic surgeons, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: A national comparison of the geographical distribution between breast surgeons and plastic surgeons indicates a shortage of plastic surgeons, especially in rural and suburban areas.

Results from the American Society of Breast Surgeons Oncoplastic Surgery Committee 2017 Survey: Current Practice and Future Directions.

INTRODUCTION: Oncoplastic surgery is emerging as a validated, safe, patient-centric approach to breast cancer surgery in the United States. The American Society of Breast Surgeons Oncoplastic Surgery Committee (ASBrS-OSC) conducted a survey to assess the scope of practice and level of interest in oncoplastic surgery among its members. Furthermore, the group sought to identify barriers to incorporating oncoplastic skills in a surgeon's practice. METHODS: A 10-question survey was administered in March 2017 to the entire ASBrS membership using an online format. Three solicitations were sent. Unique identifiers allowed a single response. RESULTS: Of the 2655 surveys sent out, 708 members responded. Nearly all (99%) respondents had at least some interest in oncoplastic surgery. The current rates of performing nipple-sparing mastectomy, adjacent tissue transfer, and breast reduction with lumpectomy were 80, 60, and 51%, respectively. A minority of respondents reported independently performing breast reductions/mammaplasties (19%) or contralateral symmetrization (10%). Barriers to learning oncoplastic surgery included surgeon's time and access to oncoplastic educational material/courses. Most respondents felt that training courses and videos may allow them to better incorporate oncoplastic techniques in their practices. CONCLUSIONS: The interest in oncoplastic surgery among U.S. surgeons is significant, yet there are barriers to incorporate these surgical techniques into a breast surgeon's practice. As professional organizations provide access to effective training and enduring educational resources, breast surgeons will be enabled to develop their oncoplastic skill set and safely offer these techniques to their patients.

Hypofractionated Whole Breast Irradiation and Boost-IOERT in Early Stage Breast Cancer (HIOB): First Clinical Results of a Prospective Multicenter Trial (NCT01343459).

Background and purpose: To investigate intraoperative electron radiation therapy (IOERT) as a tumor bed boost during breast conserving surgery (BCS) followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) on age-correlated in-breast recurrence (IBR) rates in patients with low- to high-risk invasive breast cancer. Material and methods: BCS and IOERT (11.1 Gy) preceded a HWBI (40.5 Gy) in 15 fractions. Five-year IBR-rates were compared by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) with best evidences in three age groups (35−40 y and 41−50 y: 3.6%, >50 y: 2%) in a prospective single arm design. Null hypothesis (H0) was defined to undershoot these benchmarks for proof of superiority. Results: Of 1445 enrolled patients, 326 met exclusion criteria, leaving 1119 as eligible for analysis. After a median follow-up of 50 months (range 0.7−104), we detected two local recurrences, both in the age group >50 y. With no observed IBR, superiority was demonstrated for the patient groups 41−50 and >50 y, respectively. For the youngest group (35−40 y), no appropriate statistical evaluation was yet possible due to insufficient recruitment. Conclusions: In terms of five-year IBR-rates, Boost-IOERT followed by HWBI has been demonstrated to be superior in patients older than 50 and in the age group 41−50 when compared to best published evidence until 2010.

American Society of Plastic Surgeons Evidence-Based Clinical Practice Guideline Revision: Reduction Mammaplasty.

SUMMARY: A multidisciplinary work group involving stakeholders from various backgrounds and societies convened to revise the guideline for reduction mammaplasty. The goal was to develop evidence-based patient care recommendations using the new American Society of Plastic Surgeons guideline methodology. The work group prioritized reviewing the evidence around the need for surgery as first-line treatment, regardless of resection weight or volume. Other factors evaluated included the need for drains, the need for postoperative oral antibiotics, risk factors that increase complications, a comparison in outcomes between the two most popular techniques (inferior and superomedial), the impact of local anesthetic on narcotic use and other nonnarcotic pain management strategies, the use of epinephrine, and the need for specimen pathology. A systematic literature review was performed, and an established appraisal process was used to rate the quality of relevant scientific research (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology). Evidence-based recommendations were made and strength was determined based on the level of evidence and the assessment of benefits and harms.

Toxicity and cosmetic outcome after hypofractionated whole breast irradiation and boost-IOERT in early stage breast cancer (HIOB): First results of a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459).

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To assess the role of intraoperative radiation with electrons (IOERT) as tumor bed boost followed by hypofractionated whole breast irradiation (HWBI) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) of patients with low to intermediate risk breast cancer focusing on acute/late toxicity and cosmetic outcome. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In 2011, a prospective multicenter trial (NCT01343459) was started. Treatment consisted of BCS, IOERT (11.1 Gy) and HWBI (40.5 Gy in 15 fractions). In a single-arm design, 5-year IBR-rates are benchmarked by a sequential ratio test (SQRT) against best published evidences in 3 age groups (35-40 y, 41-50 y, >50 y). Acute/late toxicity and cosmesis were evaluated by validated scorings systems. RESULTS: Of 627 eligible patients, 44 were excluded, leaving 583 to analyze. After a median follow-up (FUP) of 45 months (range 0-74), for acute effects CTCAE-score 0/1 was noted in 91% (end of HWBI) and 92% (4 weeks later), respectively. Late toxicity Grading 0/1 (mean values, ranges) by LENT-SOMA criteria were observed in 92.7% (89-97.3) at 4/5 months, rising to 96.5% (91-100) at 6 years post HWBI. Baseline cosmesis after wound healing prior to HWBI was scored as excellent/good in 86% of cases by subjective (patient) and in 74% by objective (doctor) assessment with no impairment thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: Acute and late treatment tolerance of a combined Boost-IOERT/HWBI regimen is excellent in short/mid-term assessment. Postoperative cosmetic appearance is not impaired after 3 years FUP.