Safety and efficacy of immediate autologous breast reconstruction after mastectomy in patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Immediate autologous breast reconstruction (IABR) offers fewer surgeries with better psychosocial, quality of life and aesthetic outcomes. In high-risk patients or those with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC), adjuvant postmastectomy radiotherapy decreases local recurrence and improves survival. However, it has negative effects on the reconstructed flap. Reversing the treatment protocol using neoadjuvant radiotherapy may minimise the negative effects on the reconstructed breast in women requesting IABR. We assessed the safety and efficacy of women who underwent mastectomy and IABR post-neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NACRT) for LABC. METHODOLOGY: A cohort study using a retrospective and prospective analysis was performed on women with LABC who underwent mastectomy and IABR post-NACRT between 1998 and 2018. All reconstructions were performed by oncoplastic breast surgeons from a single unit. Outcome measures analysed included surgical complications, flap failure, loco-regional recurrence, overall and disease-free survival. This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2013). This study was approved by the institutional review board. RESULTS: A total of 28 women with a median age of 50 (33-64) were included. 25% underwent TRAM flap and 75% underwent LD flap reconstruction. The median period of follow-up was 61 months. Post-NACRT, 35.7% achieved complete pathological response (PCR). 3/28 (10.7%) had early complications (2 implant and 1 donor site infection). 7% underwent revision surgery. There was no flap loss. 1/28 (3.5%) had loco-regional recurrence, 3.2% had distant metastasis, and 2.5% had breast cancer related mortality. CONCLUSION: In women with LABC, NACRT followed by mastectomy and IABR is safe and may not compromise oncological and cosmetic outcomes. If offers the benefits of immediate breast reconstruction and avoids delaying adjuvant therapy.

Biological and synthetic mesh assisted breast reconstruction procedures: Joint guidelines from the Association of Breast Surgery and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons.

These guidelines have been produced with the involvement of the Association of Breast Surgery and the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons. Recommendations have been derived after a review of published data regarding the use of acellular dermal matrix (ADM), biological and synthetic mesh in breast reconstruction. The guidelines represent a consensus opinion on the optimal management of patients having biological or synthetic mesh assisted breast reconstruction informed by peer-review publications. The Guidelines should be used to inform clinical decision making. Ultimately, members of the MDT remain responsible for the treatment of patients under their care.

Current margin practice and effect on re-excision rates following the publication of the SSO-ASTRO consensus and ABS consensus guidelines: a national prospective study of 2858 women undergoing breast-conserving therapy in the UK and Ireland.

INTRODUCTION: There is variation in margin policy for breast conserving therapy (BCT) in the UK and Ireland. In response to the Society of Surgical Oncology and American Society for Radiation Oncology (SSO-ASTRO) margin consensus ('no ink on tumour' for invasive and 2 mm for ductal carcinoma in situ [DCIS]) and the Association of Breast Surgery (ABS) consensus (1 mm for invasive and DCIS), we report on current margin practice and unit infrastructure in the UK and Ireland and describe how these factors impact on re-excision rates. METHODS: A trainee collaborative-led multicentre prospective study was conducted in the UK and Ireland between 1st February and 31st May 2016. Data were collected on consecutive BCT patients and on local infrastructure and policies. RESULTS: A total of 79 sites participated in the data collection (75% screening units; average 372 cancers annually, range 70-900). For DCIS, 53.2% of units accept 1 mm and 38% accept 2-mm margins. For invasive disease 77.2% accept 1 mm and 13.9% accept 'no ink on tumour'. A total of 2858 patients underwent BCT with a mean re-excision rate of 17.2% across units (range 0-41%). The re-excision rate would be reduced to 15% if all units applied SSO-ASTRO guidelines and to 14.8% if all units followed ABS guidelines. Of those who required re-operation, 65% had disease present at margin. CONCLUSION: There continues to be large variation in margin policy and re-excision rates across units. Altering margin policies to follow either SSO-ASTRO or ABS guidelines would result in a modest reduction in the national re-excision rate. Most re-excisions are for involved margins rather than close margins.