ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is an oncologically safe approach for breast cancer treatment and prevention; however, there are little long-term data to guide management for patients whose nipple margins contain tumor or atypia. METHODS: NSM patients with tumor or atypia in their nipple margin were identified from a prospectively maintained, single-institution database of consecutive NSMs. Patient and tumor characteristics, treatment, recurrence, and survival data were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 3158 NSMs were performed from June 2007 to August 2019. Nipple margins contained tumor in 117 (3.7%) NSMs and atypia only in 164 (5.2%) NSMs. Among 117 nipple margins that contained tumor, 34 (29%) margins contained invasive cancer, 80 (68%) contained ductal carcinoma in situ only, and 3 (3%) contained lymphatic vessel invasion only. Management included nipple-only excision in 67 (57%) breasts, nipple-areola complex excision in 35 (30%) breasts, and no excision in 15 (13%) breasts. Only 23 (24%) excised nipples contained residual tumor. At 67 months median follow-up, there were 2 (1.8%) recurrences in areolar or peri-areolar skin, both in patients with nipple-only excision. Among 164 nipple margins containing only atypia, 154 (94%) nipples were retained. At 60 months median follow-up, no patient with atypia alone had a nipple or areola recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Nipple excision is effective management for nipple margins containing tumor. No intervention is required for nipple margins containing only atypia. Our results support broad eligibility for NSM with careful nipple margin assessment.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Margins of Excision , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local , Nipples , Organ Sparing Treatments , Humans , Female , Nipples/surgery , Nipples/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Middle Aged , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Follow-Up Studies , Adult , Organ Sparing Treatments/methods , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Prognosis , Survival Rate , Aged , Prospective Studies , Mastectomy, Subcutaneous/methods , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Neoplasm, Residual/surgery , Neoplasm, Residual/pathologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Implant-based breast reconstruction is a common plastic surgery procedure with well-documented clinical outcomes. Despite this, the natural history and timing of key complication endpoints are not well described. The goal of this study is to determine when patients are most likely to experience specific adverse events after implant-based reconstruction. METHODS: Retrospective consecutive series of patients who received mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction over a 6-year period were included. Complications and unfavorable outcomes including hematoma, seroma, wound infection, skin flap necrosis, capsular contracture, implant rippling, and implant loss were identified. A time-to-event analysis was performed and Cox regression models identified patient and treatment characteristics associated with each outcome. RESULTS: Of 1473 patients and 2434 total reconstructed breasts, 785 complications/unfavorable outcomes were identified. The 12-month cumulative incidence of hematoma was 1.4%, seroma: 4.3%, infection: 3.2%, skin flap necrosis: 3.9%, capsular contracture: 5.7%, implant rippling: 7.1%, and implant loss: 3.9%. In the analysis, 332/785 (42.3%) complications occurred within 60 days of surgery; 94% of hematomas, 85% of skin necrosis events, and 75% of seromas occurred during this period. Half of all infections and implant losses also occurred within 60 days. Of the remaining complications, 94% of capsular contractures and 93% of implant rippling occurred >60 days from surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Complications following mastectomy and implant-based reconstruction exhibit a discrete temporal distribution. These data represent the first comprehensive study of the timing of adverse events following implant-based reconstruction. These findings are immediately useful to guide postoperative care, follow-up, and clinical trial design.
Subject(s)
Breast Implantation , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Mastectomy/methods , Breast Implantation/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Seroma/etiology , Seroma/complications , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Follow-Up Studies , Mammaplasty/adverse effects , Mammaplasty/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Hematoma/etiology , Hematoma/complications , Necrosis/complications , Breast Implants/adverse effects , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Retention of the nipple-areola complex with nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) techniques provides a more natural cosmetic result than procedures that sacrifice the nipple. While the oncologic safety of NSM is established by several studies, there is little long-term data on outcomes in BRCA mutation carriers with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BRCA1/2 mutation carriers who underwent NSM and immediate reconstruction from 2008 to 2019 were reviewed and patients with breast cancer on biopsy or final pathology were included. Patient demographics and tumor characteristics, as well as treatment, recurrence, and survival data were collected. RESULTS: A total of 114 therapeutic NSM were performed in 105 BRCA mutation carriers (56 BRCA1, 47 BRCA2, and two women with both mutations). Median age was 45 years. Cancers were 18% stage 0, 52% stage I, 27% stage II, and 3% stage III. Mean invasive tumor size was 1.6 cm and 33 (35%) invasive tumors were triple negative. There were five (4.4%) positive nipple margins on final pathology; all underwent nipple excision. Most patients (80, 76%) received systemic therapy: 65 (62%) received chemotherapy and 48 (46%) received endocrine therapy. At 70 months median follow-up (range 15-150 months), no patient had developed a recurrence in the retained nipple-areola complex or at the site of a nipple excised for a positive margin. The rate of locoregional recurrence outside the nipple was 2.6%, and the rate of distant recurrence was 3.8%. Overall survival was 96%. CONCLUSIONS: NSM is a safe option for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers who undergo mastectomy for breast cancer.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Humans , Female , Middle Aged , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Mastectomy/methods , BRCA1 Protein/genetics , Nipples/surgery , Nipples/pathology , Follow-Up Studies , BRCA2 Protein/genetics , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/pathology , Mammaplasty/methods , Mutation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of same-day mastectomy with reconstruction has continued to increase across the United States in recent years. Prior studies have shown that same-day mastectomy with reconstruction leads to increased patient satisfaction and allows hospitals to use resources better. This study sought to evaluate the implementation of same-day mastectomy with a reconstruction recovery protocol for patients undergoing mastectomy at our institution. METHODS: Under an institutional review board-approved protocol, a retrospective cohort analysis compared patients who underwent mastectomy April 2016 through April 2017 with those who had mastectomy March 2020 through March 2021. Length of stay, postoperative intravenous (IV) opioid administration, safety end points, and cost were the main variables examined. RESULTS: The study compared 457 patients in 2016-2017 with 428 patients in 2020-2021. The median hospital length of stay decreased from 24.6 h in 2016-2017 to 5.5 h in 2020-2021 (p < 0.001). The percentage of patients requiring postoperative IV opioids decreased from 69.1 % in 2016-2017 to 50 % in 2020-2021 (p < 0.001). The rates of unplanned readmissions within 30 days after mastectomy did not differ between the two groups, with a rate of 3.7 % in 2016-2017 and a rate of 5.1 % in 2020-2021 (p = 0.30). Reducing the rate of overnight admissions after mastectomy by 65.8 % resulted in a cost reduction of 65.8 %. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of same-day mastectomy with a reconstruction protocol across a large academic center and two satellite sites was a safe alternative to conventional mastectomy recovery plans.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Analgesics, Opioid , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Length of Stay , Mammaplasty/methods , Mastectomy/methods , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is an oncologically safe alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM). This study evaluated whether NSM patients were more satisfied than SSM patients in short- and long-term follow-up. METHODS: Women who underwent NSM or SSM between 2009 and 2019 completed a postoperative BREAST-Q survey at least 1 year after surgery and patient characteristics were compared. Patient satisfaction at 1-5 years and 6-10 years after NSM and SSM were analyzed. RESULTS: Overall, 431 patients were included; 247 had NSM and 184 had SSM 1-10 years prior to BREAST-Q survey completion. SSM patients were older, had higher body mass index (BMI), larger breast weight, and more hypertension than NSM patients, but oncologic treatments were similar between groups. BREAST-Q Psychosocial Well-Being and Sexual Well-Being scores were significantly higher in NSM patients compared with SSM patients in the 1-5 years cohort; however, scores attenuated in the 6-10 years cohort. Satisfaction with breasts was nearly significantly higher in NSM patients compared with SSM patients in the 1-5 years cohort (p = 0.056), but no different in the 6-10 years cohort. Receipt of adjuvant chemotherapy, receipt of postmastectomy radiation therapy, and BMI ≥30 were independent risk factors for dissatisfaction with breasts. CONCLUSIONS: Women who are not candidates for NSM should be reassured that long-term qualify of life is not significantly different between SSM and NSM. Dissatisfaction with reconstructed breasts is linked with other factors (besides the nipple), which patients should be made aware of at the time of surgical decision making.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Mastectomy, Subcutaneous , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Nipples/surgery , Patient Satisfaction , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND. Screening mammography facilities closed during the COVID-19 pandemic in spring 2020. Recovery of screening volumes has varied across patient subgroups and facilities. OBJECTIVE. We compared screening mammography volumes and patient and facility characteristics between periods before COVID-19 and early and later postclosure recovery periods. METHODS. This retrospective study included screening mammograms performed in the same 2-month period (May 26-July 26) in 2019 (pre-COVID-19), 2020 (early recovery), and 2021 (late recovery after targeted interventions to expand access) and across multiple facility types (urban, suburban, community health center). Suburban sites had highest proportion of White patients and the greatest scheduling flexibility and expanded appointments during initial reopening. Findings were compared across years. RESULTS. For White patients, volumes decreased 36.6% from 6550 in 2019 (4384 in 2020) and then increased 61.0% to 6579 in 2021; for patients with races other than White, volumes decreased 53.9% from 1321 in 2019 (609 in 2020) and then increased 136.8% to 1442 in 2021. The percentage of mammograms in patients with races other than White was 16.8% in 2019, 12.2% in 2020, and 18.0% in 2021. The proportion performed at the urban center was 55.3% in 2019, 42.2% in 2020, and 45.9% in 2021; the proportion at suburban sites was 34.0% in 2019, 49.2% in 2020, and 43.5% in 2021. Pre-COVID-19 volumes were reached by the sixth week after reopening for suburban sites but were not reached during early recovery for the other sites. The proportion that were performed on Saturday for suburban sites was similar across periods, whereas the proportion performed on Saturday for the urban site was 7.6% in 2019, 5.3% in 2020, and 8.8% in 2021; the community health center did not offer Saturday appointments during recovery. CONCLUSION. After reopening, screening shifted from urban to suburban settings, with a disproportionate screening decrease in patients with races other than White. Initial delayed access at facilities serving underserved populations exacerbated disparities. Interventions to expand access resulted in late recovery volumes exceeding prepandemic volumes in patients with races other than White. CLINICAL IMPACT. Interventions to support equitable access across facilities serving diverse patient populations may mitigate potential widening disparities in breast cancer diagnosis during the pandemic.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , COVID-19 , Architectural Accessibility , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Early Detection of Cancer , Female , Humans , Mammography/methods , Mass Screening , Pandemics , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The 2014 Society of Surgical Oncology/American Society for Radiation Oncology (SSO/ASTRO) breast-conserving surgery (BCS) margin guidelines for invasive cancer recommended "no ink on tumor" as an adequate margin width. However, 2016 SSO/ASTRO margin guidelines for pure DCIS recommended a 2 mm margin. Thus, management of a margin with DCIS > 0 mm but < 2 mm differs based on presence or absence of invasive carcinoma. We compared rates of residual disease in patients with pure DCIS to patients with invasive cancer with DCIS. METHODS: BCS with complete shaved cavity margins (SCM) for invasive carcinoma or pure DCIS from 2004 to 2006 at our institution was reviewed. Margin width was measured on the main specimen and the presence of carcinoma in the SCM was used as a surrogate for residual disease in the cavity. Rates of residual disease were determined for varying margin widths of invasive carcinoma and DCIS. RESULTS: Of 329 BCS patients, 123 (37%) patients had pure DCIS and 206 (63%) had invasive cancer with DCIS. In the pure DCIS cohort, 61 patients had DCIS between 0 and 2 mm from the inked margin; 32 (52%) of which had residual disease in the SCM. In the invasive cancer plus DCIS cohort, 92 had DCIS between 0 and 2 mm from the inked margin; 39 (42%) of which had residual disease in the SCM (p = 0.221). CONCLUSION: Rates of residual disease are similar in patients treated with lumpectomy for pure DCIS and those with invasive carcinoma with DCIS when DCIS is found between 0 and 2 mm from the inked margin.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Female , Humans , Margins of Excision , Mastectomy, Segmental , Neoplasm, ResidualABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Safe breast cancer lumpectomies require microscopically clear margins. Real-time margin assessment options are limited, and 20-40% of lumpectomies have positive margins requiring re-excision. The LUM Imaging System previously showed excellent sensitivity and specificity for tumor detection during lumpectomy surgery. We explored its impact on surgical workflow and performance across patient and tumor types. METHODS: We performed IRB-approved, prospective, non-randomized studies in breast cancer lumpectomy procedures. The LUM Imaging System uses LUM015, a protease-activated fluorescent imaging agent that identifies residual tumor in the surgical cavity walls. Fluorescent cavity images were collected in real-time and analyzed using system software. RESULTS: Cavity and specimen images were obtained in 55 patients injected with LUM015 at 0.5 or 1.0 mg/kg and in 5 patients who did not receive LUM015. All tumor types were distinguished from normal tissue, with mean tumor:normal (T:N) signal ratios of 3.81-5.69. T:N ratios were 4.45 in non-dense and 4.00 in dense breasts (p = 0.59) and 3.52 in premenopausal and 4.59 in postmenopausal women (p = 0.19). Histopathology and tumor receptor testing were not affected by LUM015. Falsely positive readings were more likely when tumor was present < 2 mm from the adjacent specimen margin. LUM015 signal was stable in vivo at least 6.5 h post injection, and ex vivo at least 4 h post excision. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative use of the LUM Imaging System detected all breast cancer subtypes with robust performance independent of menopausal status and breast density. There was no significant impact on histopathology or receptor evaluation.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mastectomy, Segmental , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Neoplasm, Residual , Peptide Hydrolases , Prospective Studies , ReoperationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The European Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology Advisory Committee in Radiation Oncology Practice (ESTRO-ACROP) recently released new contouring guidelines for postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) after implant-based reconstruction (IBR). As compared to prior ESTRO guidelines, the new guidelines primarily redefined the chest wall (CW) target to exclude the breast prosthesis. In this study, we assessed the impact of these changes on treatment planning and dosimetric outcomes using volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT) and proton pencil-beam scanning (PBS) therapy. METHODS: We performed a treatment planning study of 10 women with left-sided breast cancer who underwent PMRT after IBR. All target structures were delineated first using standard (ESTRO) breast contouring guidelines and then separately using the new (ESTRO-ACROP) guidelines. Standard organs-at-risk (OARs) and cardiac substructures were contoured. Four sets of plans were generated: (1) VMAT using standard ESTRO contours, (2) VMAT using new ESTRO-ACROP contours, (3) PBS using standard contours, and (4) PBS using new contours. RESULTS: VMAT plans using the new ESTRO-ACROP guidelines resulted in modest sparing of the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) (mean dose: 6.99 Gy standard ESTRO vs. 6.08 Gy new ESTRO-ACROP, p = 0.010) and ipsilateral lung (V20: 21.66% vs 19.45%, p = 0.017), but similar exposure to the heart (mean dose: 4.6 Gy vs. 4.3 Gy, p = 0.513), with a trend toward higher contralateral lung (V5: 31.0% vs 35.3%, p = 0.331) and CW doses (V5: 31.9% vs 35.4%, p = 0.599). PBS plans using the new guidelines resulted in further sparing of the heart (mean dose: 1.05 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.54 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), nearly all cardiac substructures (LAD mean dose: 2.01 Gy(RBE) vs. 0.66 Gy(RBE), p < 0.001), and ipsilateral lung (V20: 16.22% vs 6.02%, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: PMRT after IBR using the new ESTRO-ACROP contouring guidelines with both VMAT and PBS therapy is associated with significant changes in exposure to several cardiopulmonary structures.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Mammaplasty , Proton Therapy , Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated , Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Organs at Risk , Protons , Radiotherapy Dosage , Radiotherapy Planning, Computer-AssistedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, most breast surgery for benign and malignant conditions has been postponed, creating a backlog of patients who will need surgery. A fair and transparent system for assessing the risk of further delaying surgery for individual patients to prioritize surgical scheduling is needed. METHODS: Factors related to risk of delaying surgery for breast patients were identified. Scores were assigned to each factor, with higher scores indicating a greater risk from delaying surgery. REDCap and Microsoft Excel tools were designed to track and score delayed patients. RESULTS: Published data and multidisciplinary clinical judgement were used to assign risk scores based on patient and tumor factors, length of delay, and tumor response to preoperative therapy. Patients completing neoadjuvant chemotherapy were assigned the highest scores as their options for delaying surgery are most limited. Among patients receiving neoadjuvant endocrine therapy or no medical therapy, higher scores were assigned for low-estrogen receptor or high-genomic risk scores, higher grade, larger tumors, younger age and longer delay. High priority scores were assigned for progression during preoperative therapy. Low scores were assigned for re-excisions, atypical lesions and other benign indications. There was good agreement of the tool's ranking of sample patients with rankings by experienced clinicians. The tool generates risk-stratified patient lists by surgeon or institution to facilitate assignment of surgery dates. CONCLUSIONS: This tool generates a clinically consistent, risk-stratified priority list of breast surgical procedures delayed by the COVID-19 pandemic. This systematic approach may facilitate surgical scheduling as conditions normalize.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Coronavirus Infections , Mastectomy , Neoplasm Staging , Pandemics , Pneumonia, Viral , Risk Assessment , Time-to-Treatment , Betacoronavirus , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , COVID-19 , Coronavirus Infections/epidemiology , Female , Humans , Pneumonia, Viral/epidemiology , SARS-CoV-2ABSTRACT
The article Feasibility Study of a Novel Protease-Activated Fluorescent Imaging System for Real-Time, Intraoperative Detection of Residual Breast Cancer in Breast Conserving Surgery, written by Barbara L. Smith et al., was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal on January 2, 2020, without open access.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Obtaining tumor-free margins is critical to prevent recurrence after lumpectomy for breast cancer. Unfortunately, current approaches leave positive margins that require second surgeries in 20-40% of patients. We assessed the LUM Imaging System for real-time, intraoperative detection of residual tumor. METHODS: Breast lumpectomy cavity walls and excised specimens were assessed with the LUM Imaging System after 1 mg/kg intravenous LUM015, a protease-activatable fluorescent agent. Fluorescence at potential sites of residual tumor in lumpectomy cavity walls was evaluated intraoperatively with a sterile hand-held probe, with real-time predictive results displayed on a monitor intraoperatively, and later correlated with histopathology. RESULTS: In vivo lumpectomy cavities and excised specimens were imaged after LUM015 injection in 45 women undergoing breast cancer surgery. Invasive ductal and lobular cancers and intraductal cancer (DCIS) were included. A total of 570 cavity margin surfaces in 40 patients were used for algorithm development. Image analysis and display took approximately 1 s per 2.6-cm-diameter circular margin surface. All breast cancer subtypes could be distinguished from adjacent normal tissue. For all imaged cavity surfaces, sensitivity for tumor detection was 84%. Among 8 patients with positive margins after standard surgery, sensitivity for residual tumor detection was 100%; 2 of 8 were spared second surgeries because additional tissue was excised at sites of LUM015 signal. Specificity was 73%, with some benign tissues showing elevated fluorescent signal. CONCLUSIONS: The LUM015 agent and LUM Imaging System allow rapid identification of residual tumor in the lumpectomy cavity of breast cancer patients and may reduce rates of positive margins.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Intraoperative Care , Mastectomy, Segmental/methods , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/diagnosis , Neoplasm, Residual/diagnosis , Peptide Hydrolases/metabolism , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Diagnostic Imaging , Feasibility Studies , Female , Fluorescent Dyes/chemistry , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Invasiveness , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Neoplasm, Residual/surgery , Prognosis , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Bilateral reduction mammoplasty is one of the most common plastic surgery procedures performed in the U.S. This study examines the incidence, management, and prognosis of incidental breast cancer identified in reduction specimens from a large cohort of reduction mammoplasty patients. METHODS: Breast pathology reports were retrospectively reviewed for evidence of incidental cancers in bilateral reduction mammoplasty specimens from five institutions between 1990 and 2017. RESULTS: A total of 4804 women met the inclusion criteria of this study; incidental cancer was identified in 45 breasts of 39 (0.8%) patients. Six patients (15%) had bilateral cancer. Overall, the maximum diagnosis by breast was 16 invasive cancers and 29 ductal carcinomas in situs. Thirty-three patients had unilateral cancer, 15 (45.5%) of which had high-risk lesions in the contralateral breast. Twenty-one patients underwent mastectomy (12 bilateral and nine unilateral), residual cancer was found in 10 in 25 (40%) therapeutic mastectomies. Seven patients did not undergo mastectomy received breast radiation. The median follow-up was 92 months. No local recurrences were observed in the patients undergoing mastectomy or radiation. Three of 11 (27%) patients who did not undergo mastectomy or radiation developed a local recurrence. The overall survival rate was 87.2% and disease-free survival was 82.1%. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing reduction mammoplasty for macromastia have a small but definite risk of incidental breast cancer. The high rate of bilateral cancer, contralateral high-risk lesions, and residual disease at mastectomy mandates thorough pathologic evaluation and careful follow-up of these patients. Mastectomy or breast radiation is recommended for local control given the high likelihood of local recurrence without either.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/etiology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Disease Management , Female , Humans , Incidence , Mammaplasty/methods , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Grading , Public Health Surveillance , Retrospective Studies , Treatment Outcome , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Analgesics, Opioid/administration & dosage , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Mammaplasty/methods , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Pain Management/methods , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Breast Implants , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Length of Stay , Middle Aged , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Preoperative Care , Prognosis , Retrospective Studies , Tissue Expansion DevicesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Obtaining tumor-free surgical margins is critical to prevent recurrence in breast-conserving surgery but it remains challenging. We assessed the LUM Imaging System for real-time, intraoperative detection of residual tumor. METHODS: Lumpectomy cavity walls and excised specimens of breast cancer lumpectomy patients were assessed with the LUM Imaging System (Lumicell, Inc., Wellesley MA) with and without intravenous LUM015, a cathepsin-activatable fluorescent agent. Fluorescence at potential sites of residual tumor was evaluated with a sterile hand-held probe, displayed on a monitor and correlated with histopathology. RESULTS: Background autofluorescence was assessed in excised specimens from 9 patients who did not receive LUM015. In vivo lumpectomy cavities and excised specimens were then imaged in 15 women undergoing breast cancer surgery who received no LUM015, 0.5, or 1 mg/kg LUM015 (5 women per dose). Among these, 11 patients had invasive carcinoma with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and 4 had only DCIS. Image acquisition took 1 s for each 2.6-cm-diameter surface. No significant background normal breast fluorescence was identified. Elevated fluorescent signal was seen from invasive cancers and DCIS. Mean tumor-to-normal signal ratios were 4.70 ± 1.23 at 0.5 mg/kg and 4.22 ± 0.9 at 1.0 mg/kg (p = 0.54). Tumor was distinguished from normal tissue in pre-and postmenopausal women and readings were not affected by breast density. Some benign tissues produced fluorescent signal with LUM015. CONCLUSION: The LUM Imaging System allows rapid identification of residual tumor in the lumpectomy cavity of breast cancer patients and may reduce rates of positive margins.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cathepsins , Mastectomy, Segmental , Neoplasm, Residual/diagnostic imaging , Neoplasm, Residual/pathology , Optical Imaging , Adult , Aged , Biopsy , Breast Neoplasms/metabolism , Female , Humans , Immunohistochemistry , Intraoperative Period , Mastectomy, Segmental/methods , Middle Aged , Neoplasm, Residual/metabolism , Optical Imaging/methods , Surgery, Computer-AssistedABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a nonradioactive magnetic marker wireless localization technique. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective review was performed of consecutive patients who underwent image-guided needle localization with nonradioactive magnetic markers and subsequent surgical excision from March to August 2017. Indications for marker placement, lesion type, imaging guidance used for marker placement, postprocedure mammographic imaging and reports, surgical reports, and surgical margin status were reviewed. RESULTS: A total of 188 patients (mean age, 59 years; range, 22-89 years) underwent image-guided localization with 213 magnetic markers and subsequent surgical excision. The indications for marker placement included invasive carcinoma (96 markers [45.1%]), ductal carcinoma in situ (41 markers [19.2%]), and high-risk lesions (71 markers [33.3%]). Localization markers were most commonly placed for masses (96 markers [45.1%]) and were deployed under mammographic guidance (160 markers [75.1%]) or sonographic guidance (53 markers [24.9%]). Technical success, which was defined as placement of the magnetic marker within 1 cm of the target, was achieved for 206 of 213 markers (96.7%). All 213 markers were successfully retrieved at surgery. Of 137 cases of in situ or invasive carcinoma, 30 (21.9%) had tumor-positive or close surgical margins that required reexcision. No major or minor complications were observed during marker placement, intraoperatively, or postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Image-guided needle localization with magnetic markers is a safe, feasible, and effective method for localizing breast lesions. Magnetic marker localization has the potential to replace conventional wire needle localization and radioactive seed needle localization for lesions that require surgical excision.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Fiducial Markers , Magnetics/instrumentation , Needles , Radiography, Interventional/instrumentation , Ultrasonography, Interventional/instrumentation , Ultrasonography, Mammary/instrumentation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Equipment Design , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Program Evaluation , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to determine the performance and added value of bilateral mammography in identifying cancers distant from sites of presenting breast symptoms in women 30-39 years old. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A search identified consecutively registered women 30-39 years old who underwent mammography and ultrasound to evaluate focal breast symptoms between June 2006 and August 2016. Outcomes were determined by imaging and pathologic analysis through linkage with a tumor registry. Medical records were reviewed to determine the presence of breast cancer risk factors. Lifetime breast cancer risk was calculated with the International Breast Cancer Intervention Study model. RESULTS: The study included 4426 diagnostic examinations of 3997 women 30-39 years old. Sixty-eight breast cancers were diagnosed (cancer detection rate, 15.4 per 1000 examinations). Sixty examinations led to biopsy of a finding distant from the presenting symptom site, yielding nine incidental malignancies (positive predictive value, 15.0%; incidental cancer detection rate, 2.0 per 1000 examinations [9/4426]). Among the other 59 cancers diagnosed in the symptomatic area, bilateral mammography depicted multicentric or contra-lateral disease in seven (11.9%). Average lifetime risk of breast cancer among the 68 women with cancer was significantly higher than that among age-matched control subjects (22.8% vs 13.1%, p < 0.001); 45 of these 68 women (66.2%) had identifiable risk factors. Lifetime risk among the nine women with incidental cancers was higher than that of age-matched control subjects, although without statistical significance (24.9% vs 13.2%, p = 0.07). CONCLUSION: Bilateral mammographic evaluation of women 30-39 years old presenting with breast symptoms yielded an additional 2.0 incidental cancers per 1000 examinations. The low added cancer yield may support the judicious rather than routine use of mammography in this patient cohort.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Mammography , Adult , Age Factors , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Female , Humans , Predictive Value of Tests , Retrospective Studies , Risk Assessment , Symptom AssessmentABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate the influence of age at diagnosis of atypical hyperplasia ("atypia", ductal [ADH], lobular [ALH], or severe ADH) on the risk of developing subsequent invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). METHODS: Using standard survival analysis methods, we retrospectively analyzed 1353 women not treated with chemoprevention among a cohort of 2370 women diagnosed with atypical hyperplasia to determine the risk relationship between age at diagnosis and subsequent breast cancer. RESULTS: For all atypia diagnoses combined, our cohort showed a 5-, 10-, and 15-year risk of invasive breast cancer or DCIS of 0.56, 1.25, and 1.30, respectively, with no significant difference in the (65,75] year age group. For women aged (35,75] years, we observed no significant difference in the 15-year risk of invasive breast cancer or DCIS after atypical hyperplasia, although the baseline risk for a 40-year-old woman is approximately 1/8 the risk of a 70-year-old woman. The risks associated with invasive breast cancer or DCIS for women in our cohort diagnosed with ADH, severe ADH, or ALH, regardless of age, were 7.6% (95% CI 5.9-9.3%) at 5 years, 25.1% (20.7-29.2%) at 10 years, and 40.1% (32.8-46.6%) at 15 years. CONCLUSION: In contrast to current risk prediction models (e.g., Gail, Tyrer-Cuzick) which assume that the risk of developing breast cancer increases in relation to age at diagnosis of atypia, we found the 15-year cancer risk in our cohort was not significantly different for women between the ages of 35 (excluded) and 75. This implies that the "hits" received by the breast tissue along the "high-risk pathway" to cancer might possibly supersede other factors such as age.