Radiofrequency identification tag localization is comparable to wire localization for non-palpable breast lesions.

PURPOSE: Radiofrequency identification (RFID) tag localization (TL) is a technique of localizing non-palpable breast lesions that can be performed prior to surgery. We sought to evaluate whether TL is comparable to wire localization (WL) in regard to specimen size, operative time, and re-excision rate. METHODS: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL and WL excisional biopsies and lumpectomies performed by 5 surgeons at 2 institutions. Cases were stratified by surgery type and surgical indication. Associations between localization technique and specimen volume, operative time, and re-excision rate were assessed by univariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: A total of 503 procedures were included, 147 TL (29.2%) and 356 WL (70.8%). Nineteen (12.9%) RFID tags were placed before surgery, ranging 1-22 days. All intended targets were removed. TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy specimen volumes were similar (p = 0.560 and 0.494). TL and WL excisional biopsy and lumpectomy + SLNB operative times were similar (p = 0.152 and 0.158), but TL lumpectomies without SLNB took longer than WL (57 min vs 49 min; p = 0.027). Re-excision rates were similar by surgical procedure (p = 0.615), surgical indication (DCIS p = 0.145; invasive carcinoma p = 0.759), and confirmed by multivariable analysis (OR 0.754, 95% CI 0.392-1.450; p = 0.397). CONCLUSIONS: TL has similar surgical outcomes to WL with added benefit that TL can occur prior to the day of surgery. TL is an acceptable alternative to WL and should be considered for non-palpable breast lesions.

Enhanced Recovery Minimizes Opioid Use and Hospital Stay for Patients Undergoing Mastectomy with Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the effects of an enhanced recovery program on inpatient opioid requirements and hospital length of stay (LOS) for mastectomy patients undergoing immediate reconstruction. METHODS: An enhanced recovery program for patients undergoing mastectomy with immediate tissue expander (TE) or implant reconstruction was evaluated by comparing a contemporary cohort of 611 patients in 2016-2018 with a historical cohort of 188 patients in 2010. Opioid use and LOS were compared over time and stratified by laterality, mastectomy type, axillary procedure, and reconstruction. Associations were assessed by uni- and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: In 2010, 95.2% of patients required intravenous (IV) opioids, with a last dose 15.5 h after completion of surgery, compared with 68.7% of patients in 2016-2018, with a last dose 1.8 h after surgery (p < 0.001). Patients prescribed gabapentin postoperatively were less likely to require inpatient IV or oral opioids (p < 0.001). The mean LOS decreased from 37 h in 2010 to 27.5 h in 2016-2018 without an increase in the readmission rate (6.9% vs. 4.1%; p = 0.112). Patients were more likely to stay more than one night if they were older (p = 0.012), had undergone bilateral mastectomies (p < 0.001) or TE reconstruction (p = 0.012), and had surgery in 2010 compared with 2016-2018 (p < 0.001). Even after adjustment for LOS, IV opioid use remained significantly associated with year of surgery (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Compared with 2010, patients undergoing mastectomy with TE or implant reconstruction in 2016-2018 required less inpatient opioids and had decreased LOS. The authors attribute this to an enhanced recovery program focused on preoperative counseling, non-opioid analgesics, and improved surgical efficiencies.

Comparison of Wireless Localization Alternatives with Wire Localization for Nonpalpable Breast Lesions.

BACKGROUND: Radiofrequency identification tag localization (TL) and magnetic seed localization (MSL) are alternatives to wire localization (WL) for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. We sought to compare localization methods with respect to operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate. STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on TL, MSL, and WL lumpectomies and excisional biopsies at a single institution. Association between localization method and operative time, specimen volume, and re-excision rate was assessed by multiple logistic regression using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 506 procedures were included: 147 TL (29.0%), 140 MSL (27.7%), and 219 WL (43.3%). On logistic regression analysis, MSL was associated with longer operative times than WL for excisional biopsies only (OR 4.24, 95% CI 1.92 to 9.34, p < 0.001). Mean excisional biopsy time was 39.1 minutes for MSL and 33.0 minutes for WL. Specimen volume did not vary significantly across surgery types between localization methods. In an analysis of all lumpectomies with an indication of carcinoma, marker choice was not associated with rate of re-excision (TL vs WL OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.60, p = 0.342; MSL vs WL OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.60 to 2.49, p = 0.587; TL vs MSL OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.64, p = 0.359). CONCLUSION: TL, MSL, and WL are comparable in performance for excision of nonpalpable breast lesions. Although increased operative time associated with MSL vs WL excisional biopsies is statistically significant, clinical significance warrants additional study. With similar outcomes, physicians may choose the marker most appropriate for the patient and setting.

Long-Term Outcomes of Multiple-Wire Localizations for More Extensive Breast Cancer: Multiple-Wire Excision Does Not Increase Recurrence, Unplanned Imaging, or Biopsies.

BACKGROUND: We previously reported that breast conservation was feasible for women with large or irregularly shaped breast cancers when tumor resection was guided by multiple localizing wires. We now report long-term outcomes of multiple-wire versus single-wire localized lumpectomies for breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed wire-localized lumpectomies at our institution from May 2000 to November 2006. Rates of ipsilateral in-breast tumor recurrence, metastasis, and subsequent unplanned diagnostic imaging and biopsy were compared between multiple-wire and single-wire cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 112 multiple-wire and 160 single-wire breast cancer lumpectomies that achieved clear margins. Median age was 64 years in the multiple-wire cohort and 57 years in the single-wire cohort. Mean lumpectomy volume was 75 mL in multiple-wire patients and 49 mL in single-wire patients (P = .003). Invasive tumor size, axillary node status, and use of radiation and systemic therapy were similar, but the multiple-wire group had more patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ only (38% vs. 28%). At 108 months' median follow-up, there was no significant difference in local or distant recurrence rates between multiple-wire and single-wire cohorts. Six (5%) multiple-wire patients and 6 (4%) single-wire patients had local recurrences and 3 (3%) multiple-wire and 5 (3%) single-wire patients developed metastatic disease. Unplanned diagnostic imaging was required for 53 (47%) multiple-wire and 65 (41%) single-wire patients. Subsequent ipsilateral biopsy occurred in 15 (13%) multiple-wire and 19 (12%) single-wire patients. CONCLUSION: Breast-conserving surgery with multiple localizing wires is a safe alternative to mastectomy for breast cancer patients with large mammographic lesions.

Nipple Discharge After Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With and Without Associated Pregnancy.

BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSMs) preserve the intact nipple, including nipple duct orifices. Retained orifices might remain patent and communicate with the underlying reconstruction. We report the incidence and outcomes of nipple discharge after NSM in pregnant and nonpregnant women. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective review of all NSMs at our institution from June 2007 to June 2018 was performed. Subsequent pregnancies and nipple discharge were documented. Patient demographic, operative, histopathology, and cancer treatment data were collected. Descriptive analysis was performed for patients who developed nipple discharge. RESULTS: From June 2007 to June 2018, 2778 NSM procedures were performed in 1620 patients, with a mean age of 48 (range, 20-80) years. Fifteen hundred sixty-eight NSMs were therapeutic and 1210 were for risk reduction. Thirty-three subsequent pregnancies were observed in 27 patients, with a mean age of 33 (range, 26-42) years at NSM. Bilateral or unilateral discharge occurred in 6 of 27 (22%) postpartum patients and resolved spontaneously. At 54 months mean follow-up after NSM (range, 16-98 months) and 23 (range, 1-61) months after delivery, no local-regional recurrences were observed. In 1593 patients without subsequent pregnancy, there were 4 patients (0.25%) treated with bilateral NSM with subsequent unilateral watery nipple discharge. There was no evidence of associated malignancy on physical exam, imaging, or cytology, and with 55 to 110 months follow-up, no new or recurrent cancers have been observed. CONCLUSION: Despite extensive removal of nipple and subareolar duct tissue during NSM, milky nipple discharge is possible postpartum. Watery, acellular discharge occurs rarely in nonpregnant patients. To date, no patient with discharge has developed a local recurrence or new breast cancer.