Reducing Seroma Formation and Its Sequelae After Mastectomy by Closure of the Dead Space: A Multi-center, Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial (SAM-Trial).

BACKGROUND: Seroma is a common complication after mastectomy, with an incidence of 3% to 85%. Seroma is associated with pain, delayed wound healing, and additional outpatient clinic visits, leading potentially to repeated seroma aspiration or even surgical interventions. This study aimed to assess the effect of flap fixation using sutures or tissue glue in preventing seroma formation and its sequelae. METHODS: Between June 2014 and July 2018, 339 patients with an indication for mastectomy or modified radical mastectomy were enrolled in this randomized controlled trial in the Netherlands. Patients were randomly allocated to one of the three following arms: conventional wound closure (CON, n = 115), flap fixation using sutures (FFS, n = 111) or flap fixation using tissue glue (FFG, n = 113). The primary outcome was the need for seroma aspiration. The secondary outcomes were additional outpatient department visits, surgical-site infection, shoulder function and mobility, cosmesis, skin-dimpling, and postoperative pain scores. RESULTS: Flap fixation after mastectomy leads to fewer seroma aspirations than conventional wound closure (CON 17.5% vs FFS 7.3% vs FFG 10.8%; p = 0.057), with a significant difference between flap fixation with sutures and conventional wound closure (odds ratio [OR], 0.37; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.89; p = 0.025). Flap fixation has no significant negative effect on surgical-site infections, shoulder function and mobility, cosmesis, skin-dimpling, or postoperative pain. CONCLUSION: Flap fixation using sutures leads to a significant reduction in aspirations of post-mastectomy seromas. The authors strongly advise surgeons to use sutures for flap fixation in patients undergoing mastectomy. (ClinicalTrials.gov no. NCT03305757). PREREGISTRATION: The trial was registered after enrollment of the first participant. However, no specific explanation exists for this except that through the years more importance has been given to central trial registration. Our research team can ensure that after enrollment of the first participant, no changes were made to the trial, analysis plan, and/or study design.

Economic evaluation of flap fixation techniques after mastectomy: Results of a double-blind randomized controlled trial (SAM-trial).

BACKGROUND: An economic evaluation was performed alongside an RCT investigating flap fixation in reducing seroma formation after mastectomy. The evaluation focused on the first year following mastectomy and assessed cost-effectiveness from a health care and societal perspective. METHODS: The economic evaluation was conducted between 2014 and 2018 in four Dutch breast clinics. Patients with an indication for mastectomy or modified radical mastectomy were randomly assigned to: conventional closure (CON), flap fixation with sutures (FFS) or flap fixation with tissue glue (FFG). Health care costs, patient and family costs and costs due to productivity losses were assessed. Outcomes were expressed in incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs): the incremental cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY). Bootstrapping techniques, sensitivity and secondary analyses were employed to address uncertainty. RESULTS: The FFS-group yielded most QALYs (0.810; 95%-CI 0.755-0.856), but also incurred the highest mean costs at twelve months (€10.416; 95%-CI 8.231-12.930). CON was the next best alternative with 0.794 QALYs (95%-CI 0.733-0.841) and mean annual costs of €10.051 (95%-CI 8.255-12.044). FFG incurred fewer QALYs and higher costs, when compared to the CON group. The ICER of FFS compared to CON was €22.813/QALY. Applying a willingness to pay threshold in the Netherlands of €20.000/QALY, the probability that FFS was cost-effective was 42%, compared to 37% and 21% for CON and FFG, respectively. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of FFS following mastectomy, versus CON and FFG, is uncertain from a societal perspective. Yet, from a health care and hospital perspective FFS is likely to be the most cost-effective intervention.

Negative pressure wound therapy does not decrease postoperative wound complications in patients undergoing mastectomy and flap fixation.

Patients and breast cancer surgeons are frequently confronted with wound complications after mastectomy. Negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) is a promising technique for preventing wound complications after skin closure in elective surgery. However, a clinical study evaluating postoperative complications following the use of NPWT, focusing solely on closed incisions in patients undergoing mastectomy, has yet to be performed. Between June 2019 and February 2020, 50 consecutive patients underwent mastectomy with NPWT during the first seven postoperative days. This group was compared to a cohort of patients taking part in a randomized controlled trial between June 2014 and July 2018. Primary outcome was the rate of postoperative wound complications, i.e. surgical site infections, wound necrosis or wound dehiscence during the first three postoperative months. Secondary outcomes were the number of patients requiring unplanned visits to the hospital and developing clinically significant seroma (CSS). In total, 161 patients were analyzed, of whom 111 patients in the control group (CON) and 50 patients in the NPWT group (NPWT). Twenty-eight percent of the patients in the NPWT group developed postoperative wound complications, compared to 18.9% in the control group (OR = 1.67 (95% CI 0.77-3.63), p = 0.199). The number of patients requiring unplanned visits or developing CSS was not statistically significant between the groups. This study suggests that Avelle negative pressure wound therapy in mastectomy wounds does not lead to fewer postoperative wound complications. Additionally, it does not lead to fewer patients requiring unplanned visits or fewer patients developing clinically significant seromas.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03942575. Date of registration: 08/05/2019.

A systematic review of seroma formation following drain-free mastectomy.

BACKGROUND: Seroma is a common complication after mastectomy. The aim of this review is to elucidate whether closed suction drainage can safely be omitted in patients undergoing mastectomy when assessing seroma formation and its complications. The second aim is to assess the influence of flap fixation on seroma related complications, as there is existing evidence showing that combining mastectomy with flap fixation may make the use of drainage systems obsolete. SEARCH & SELECTION: A review of the literature was performed and articles that compared mastectomy with drainage and mastectomy without drainage were selected. Due to the small number of eligible studies, no selection based on whether flap fixation was performed was possible. If outcome was described in terms of seroma formation or seroma related complications, papers were eligible for inclusion. Studies older than 20 years, animal studies, studies not written in English and studies with male patients were excluded. RESULTS: A total of eight articles were eligible for inclusion. Four prospective studies and four retrospective studies were included. In four studies, flap fixation was performed. Frequency of seroma formation as well as seroma that required intervention was reported. The included studies demonstrated that omitting closed suction drainage does not lead to a higher incidence of seroma formation in patients undergoing mastectomy. CONCLUSION: Despite substantial heterogeneity, there is evidence that drainage can safely be omitted without exacerbating seroma formation and its complications. A well-powered, randomized controlled trial evaluating the effect of drainage omission on seroma formation, with or without flap fixation, is needed.

Molecular analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer using one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA): Does not lead to overtreatment in the current era of de-escalating axillary management.

PURPOSE: OSNA is a molecular technique for sentinel lymph node (SN) analysis in breast cancer. Compared to histology, OSNA may yield more (micro)metastases and thereby result in more axillary lymph node dissections or radiotherapy. We investigated whether axillary treatments increase when using OSNA, applying current guidelines for de-escalating axillary management. METHODS: All patients treated for cT1-3N0 breast cancer in our hospital between December 2013 and February 2016 were included. In 148 prospectively included patients (January 2015-February 2016), SN's were examined with OSNA. In a retrospective cohort of 123 patients (December 2013-December 2014), SN's were examined with conventional histology. Outcomes were: number of macro and micrometastases, amount of patients receiving axillary dissection or irradiation, number of patients receiving adjuvant systemic therapy. Data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney and Pearson Chi-square test. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: 230 SN's from 123 patients were examined with conventional histology. 229 SN's from 148 patients were evaluated with OSNA. Amount of macrometastases was equal between groups (histology 17.9% versus OSNA 16.2%, p = 0.715). We found significantly more micrometastases when using OSNA (histology 11.4% versus OSNA 25.0%, p = 0.004). Total number of axillary lymph node dissections was comparable in both groups (histology 12.2%, OSNA 12.2%, p = 0.993), as well as number of axillary radiations (histology 8.9%, OSNA 11.5%, p = 0.493). Also, the number of patients receiving adjuvant systemic therapy was similar between conventional histology and OSNA (histology 53.7% versus OSNA 58.1%, p = 0.462). CONCLUSION: OSNA analysis for SN in breast cancer is a highly sensitive technique, detecting more micrometastases than standard histology. When applying current guidelines, OSNA analysis does not lead to overtreatment with more axillary dissections or irradiation.

Combination 186Re-HEDP and cisplatin supra-additive treatment effects in prostate cancer cells.

UNLABELLED: Radionuclide therapy has proven to be an efficacious palliative treatment for metastatic prostate cancer. Its potential therapeutic possibilities may be substantially increased by combining it with effective radiosensitizing drugs. METHODS: This study explores the radiosensitizing properties of cisplatin when combined with 186Re-labeled hydroxyethylidene diphosphonate (HEDP) in the treatment of R3327-MATLyLu prostate cancer cells in vitro. A concomitant incubation during 4 d, combining various concentrations of cisplatin (0, 0.42, 0.83 and 1.67 micromol/L) and 186Re-HEDP (0, 1.84 and 3.69 MBq/mL [0, 50 and 100 microCi/mL, respectively]) was followed by the determination of the cell numbers surviving and the replating of these cells in semisolid agar. RESULTS: The surviving fraction of clonogenic tumor cells after combination treatment clearly showed synergism when analyzed by a panel of three different published analytical methods. In addition, analysis of variance demonstrated a significant interaction between radionuclide therapy and cisplatin-based chemotherapy (P < 0.001). Treatment with 186Re-HEDP and cisplatin by sequential incubation yielded similar, but never superior results. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that radionuclide therapy in combination with cisplatin is able, in principle, to improve therapeutic success rate in metastatic prostate cancer in a more than additive way.