ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Optimal margins for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remain controversial in breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. We examine the association of positive margins, reoperations, DCIS and age. METHODS: A retrospective study of histopathological reports (4489 patients). Margin positivity was defined as ink on tumor for invasive carcinoma. For DCIS, we applied 2 mm anterior and side margin thresholds, and ink on tumor in the posterior margin. RESULTS: The incidence of positive side margins was 20% in BCS and 5% in mastectomies (p < 0.001). Of these patients, 68% and 14% underwent a reoperation (p < 0.001). After a positive side margin in BCS, the reoperation rates according to age groups were 74% (<49), 69% (50-64), 68% (65-79), and 42% (80+) (p = 0.013). Of BCS patients with invasive carcinoma in the side margin, 73% were reoperated on. A reoperation was performed in 70% of patients with a close (≤1 mm) DCIS side margin, compared to 43% with a wider (1.1-2 mm) margin (p = 0.002). The reoperation rates were 55% in invasive carcinoma with close DCIS, 66% in close extensive intraductal component (EIC), and 83% in close pure DCIS (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Individual assessment as opposed to rigid adherence to guidelines was used in the decision on reoperation.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Margins of Excision , Mastectomy/methods , Reoperation/statistics & numerical data , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Prognosis , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
For a female-to-male transgender person, mastectomy is the most important procedure making the social interaction easier. Along with the size of the breasts, the quantity and quality of skin will influence the selection of surgical technique. Although complications are rare, corrective surgery is performed for as many as 40% of the patients. Of male-to-female transsexual persons, 60 to 70% opt for breast enlargement. Breast enlargement can be carried out by using either silicone implants or fat transplantation. Since the surgical procedures on breasts are irreversible, their implementation requires confirmation of the diagnosis of transsexualism by a multidisciplinary team.
Subject(s)
Mammaplasty , Mastectomy , Transgender Persons , Breast Implants , Female , Humans , Male , ReoperationABSTRACT
AIM: Demand for nipple- and skin- sparing mastectomy (NSM/SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (BR) has increased at the same time as indications for post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) have broadened. The aim of the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium initiative was to address relevant questions arising with this clinically challenging scenario. METHODS: A large global panel of oncologic, oncoplastic and reconstructive breast surgeons, patient advocates and radiation oncologists developed recommendations for clinical practice in an iterative process based on the principles of Delphi methodology. RESULTS: The panel agreed that surgical technique for NSM/SSM should not be formally modified when PMRT is planned with preference for autologous over implant-based BR due to lower risk of long-term complications and support for immediate and delayed-immediate reconstructive approaches. Nevertheless, it was strongly believed that PMRT is not an absolute contraindication for implant-based or other types of BR, but no specific recommendations regarding implant positioning, use of mesh or timing were made due to absence of high-quality evidence. The panel endorsed use of patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice. It was acknowledged that the shape and size of reconstructed breasts can hinder radiotherapy planning and attention to details of PMRT techniques is important in determining aesthetic outcomes after immediate BR. CONCLUSIONS: The panel endorsed the need for prospective, ideally randomised phase III studies and for surgical and radiation oncology teams to work together for determination of optimal sequencing and techniques for PMRT for each patient in the context of BR.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mammaplasty/methods , Mastectomy/methods , Nipples , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The European Leadership Forum (ELF) of the European Society of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgery (ESPRAS) previously identified the need for harmonisation of breast reconstruction standards in Europe, in order to strengthen the role of plastic surgeons. This study aims to survey the status, current trends and potential regional differences in the practice of breast reconstruction in Europe, with emphasis on equity and access. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A largescale web-based questionnaire was sent to consultant plastic and reconstructive surgeons, who are experienced in breast reconstruction and with understanding of the national situation in their country. Suitable participants were identified via the Executive Committee (ExCo) of ESPRAS and national delegates of ESPRAS. The results were evaluated and related to evidence-based literature. RESULTS: A total of 33 participants from 29 European countries participated in this study. Overall, the incidence of breast reconstruction was reported to be relatively low across Europe, comparable to other large geographic regions, such as North America. Equity of provision and access to breast reconstruction was distributed evenly within Europe, with geographic regions potentially affecting the type of reconstruction offered. Standard practices with regard to radiotherapy differed between countries and a clear demand for European guidelines on breast reconstruction was reported. CONCLUSION: This study identified distinct lack of consistency in international practice patterns across European countries and a strong demand for consistent European guidance. Large-scale and multi-centre European clinical trials are required to further elucidate the presented areas of interest and to define European standard operating procedures.