A Multi-institutional Analysis of Factors Influencing the Rate of Positive MRI Biopsy Among Women with Early-Stage Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: The use of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) for early-stage breast cancer (ESBC) is increasing, but its utility in detecting additional malignancy is unclear and delays surgical management (Jatoi and Benson in Future Oncol 9:347-353, 2013. https://doi.org/10.2217/fon.12.186 , Bleicher et al. J Am Coll Surg 209:180-187, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2009.04.010 , Borowsky et al. J Surg Res 280:114-122, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2022.06.066 ). The present study sought to identify ESBC patients most likely to benefit from preoperative MRI by assessing the positive predictive values (PPVs) of ipsilateral and contralateral biopsies. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study included patients with cTis-T2N0-N1 breast cancer from two institutions during 2016-2021. A "positive" biopsy result was defined as additional cancer (PositiveCancer) or cancer with histology often excised (PositiveSurg). The PPV of MRI biopsies was calculated with respect to age, family history, breast density, and histology. Uni- and multivariate logistic regression determined whether combinations of age younger than 50 years, dense breasts, family history, and pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) histology led to higher biopsy yield. RESULTS: Of the included patients, 447 received preoperative MRI and 131 underwent 149 MRI-guided biopsies (96 ipsilateral, 53 contralateral [18 bilateral]). PositiveCancer for ipsilateral biopsy was 54.2%, and PositiveCancer for contralateral biopsy was 17.0%. PositiveSurg for ipsilateral biopsy was 62.5%, and PositiveSurg for contralateral biopsy was 24.5%. Among the contralateral MRI biopsies, patients younger than 50 years were less likely to have PositiveSurg (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.00-0.84; p = 0.041). The combinations of age, density, family history, and histology did not lead to a higher biopsy yield. CONCLUSION: Historically accepted factors for recommending preoperative MRI did not appear to confer a higher MRI biopsy yield. To prevent delays to surgical management, MRI should be carefully selected for individual patients most likely to benefit from additional imaging.

Lack of Racial Diversity in Surgery and Pathology Textbooks Depicting Diseases of the Breast.

INTRODUCTION: The lack of racial diversity depicted in medical education texts may contribute to an implicit racial bias among clinicians. This bias influences outcomes, as familiarity with the various cutaneous manifestations of disease is essential to making an accurate diagnosis. To better understand the racial disparities in breast surgery, we sought to determine the extent of skin tone representation depicted in images of breast surgery and pathology textbooks. METHODS: Textbooks were screened for color images of conditions with sufficient skin tissue present to assign the Fitzpatrick skin phototype (FSP). Figures were independently assigned an FP score (range: 1-6), and subdivided into "light skin" (FP 1-3) and "dark skin" (FP 4-6). Number of figures in each category and percentage of patients with each skin tone were calculated. RESULTS: 557 figures were included. Among 12 textbooks reviewed, seven textbooks were from the discipline of surgery, while five were pathology-related. Textbook year of publication spanned from 1996 to 2018. Overall, 533 (95.7%) figures depicted patients with light skin color versus 24 (4.3%) with dark skin color. There was no association between FP score and year of textbook publication (P = 0.69). CONCLUSIONS: Patient images in breast textbooks are overwhelmingly of light skin tones, excluding patients with darker skin tones. The dearth of images depicting dark skinned individuals did not improve over time. Inclusion of patients of color in future textbooks may help reduce racial disparities within breast cancer care.

Opioid-Sparing Multimodal Analgesia Protocol for Lumpectomy Patients Results in Superior Postoperative Pain Control.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine if lumpectomy patients who received perioperative opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia reported less pain when compared with those who received traditional opioid-based care. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing lumpectomy who received an opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia protocol [no opioids group (NOP)] was compared with a large cohort of patients who received traditional care [opioids group (OG)]. In-hospital and discharge opioids were compared using oral morphine equivalents (OMEs). Postoperative day one and week one pain scores were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: Overall, 1153 patients underwent lumpectomy: 634 patients received the protocol (NOP), and 519 patients did not (OG). Median pain scores were significantly lower in the NOP cohort when compared with the OG cohort the day after surgery (2 vs. 0, p < 0.001) and the week after surgery (1 vs. 0, p < 0.001). NOP patients were significantly less likely to report severe pain (7-10 on a 10-point scale) the day after surgery compared with OG patients (15.7% vs. 6.9%, p = 0.004). Patients in the NOP cohort were discharged with a median of zero OMEs (range 0-150), while patients in the OG were discharged with a median of 90 OMEs (range 0-360; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Implementation of an opioid-sparing multimodal analgesia protocol for lumpectomy patients resulted in superior pain control without a routine opioid prescription. Surgeons can improve their own patients' outcomes while addressing the larger societal issue of the opioid crisis by adopting similar protocols that decrease the quantity of opioids available for diversion.

Obese Patients Who Receive an Opioid-Sparing Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Protocol are at Increased Risk of Persistent Pain After Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Obese patients are at increased risk of persistent pain and chronic opioid dependence after surgery. We sought to evaluate the impact of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol in breast surgery patients to determine whether multimodal analgesia was effective for both obese and non-obese patients. METHODS: A prospective cohort of patients undergoing breast surgery who received an opioid-sparing ERAS protocol was compared with patients who did not receive ERAS, including a historical cohort. Pain scores were compared with respect to body mass index (BMI). Obesity was defined as BMI ≥ 30, and moderate to severe pain was defined as 4-10 of a 10-point scale. Postoperative day one and week one pain scores were compared using the Kruskal-Wallis test. RESULTS: A combined contemporary and historical cohort of 1353 patients underwent lumpectomy and mastectomy without reconstruction. The present analysis comprises 622 patients with pain scores who did and did not receive ERAS between 2015 and 2018. The two groups were demographically similar. The day after surgery, those who received ERAS reported lower rates of moderate to severe pain, regardless of BMI (obese: 46.3% vs. 21.8%, p < 0.001; non-obese: 36.3% vs. 19.4%, p = 0.002). One week after surgery, obese patients who received ERAS had higher rates of persistent pain compared with non-obese patients (18.6% vs. 11.1%, p = 0.042). CONCLUSIONS: An opioid-sparing ERAS protocol utilizing multimodal analgesia significantly improved postoperative pain control for obese and non-obese patients. However, it appears that obese patients are still at relatively greater risk for persistent pain after surgery.

Intraoperative Ketorolac Use Does Not Increase the Risk of Bleeding in Breast Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs is an effective adjunct in managing perioperative pain. We sought to determine if the use of intraoperative ketorolac as part of a multimodal ERAS protocol increased the risk of bleeding complications in breast surgery. METHODS: A subset analysis of a prospective cohort study including patients undergoing lumpectomy and mastectomy compared two groups: those who received intraoperative ketorolac and those who did not. Bleeding complications were compared using Fisher's exact test or t test, and analyzed with respect to surgical modality. Patients undergoing immediate reconstruction were excluded. RESULTS: Seven hundred and fifty-eight breast surgeries were performed in a 13-month period: 157 lumpectomy patients and 57 mastectomy patients met inclusion criteria between July 2017 and August 2018. Two hundred and fourteen patients were included in the analysis: 115 received ketorolac and 99 did not. The two groups were similar with regards to sex, age, race, tobacco use, and comorbidities. When analyzed together, there was no difference in bleeding complications between the group that received intraoperative ketorolac and those who did not (2% vs. 2.6%, p = 1.00). No hematomas occurred in the lumpectomy patients, and three occurred in mastectomy patients: one of which received ketorolac, and two did not (5.9% vs. 5.0%, p = 0.575). The rates of seroma, infection, or dehiscence were not significantly different between the two groups, regardless of surgical modality. CONCLUSIONS: The use of intraoperative ketorolac is a useful adjunct in perioperative pain management in breast surgery and does not increase the risk of bleeding.

Mastectomy is no longer an indication for postoperative opioid prescription at discharge.

BACKGROUND: A 10-step protocol employing multimodal analgesia was implemented in patients undergoing mastectomy to decrease the quantity of opioids prescribed at discharge. METHODS: Patients who received the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol were compared to a control group. Inpatient and discharge prescription of opioids were compared using oral morphine equivalents (OMEs), along with postoperative pain scores. RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2018, fifty-seven patients were eligible for inclusion: 20 patients received ERAS and 37 received usual care (UC). The ERAS group received a mean of 2.4 (0-13) inpatient OMEs and the UC group received 13.7 (0-80) (p = 0.002). The ERAS group received 2.0 (0-40) OMEs at discharge and the UC group received 59.8 (0-120) (p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the patients who received the ERAS protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who received the ERAS protocol required less postoperative opioids and reported lower pain scores when compared to a control group.

A pilot study of a breast surgery Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol to eliminate narcotic prescription at discharge.

BACKGROUND: The evolving conceptualization of the management of surgical pain was a major contributor to the supply of narcotics that led to the opioid crisis. We designed and implemented a breast surgery-specific Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol using opioid-sparing techniques to eliminate narcotic prescription at discharge without sacrificing perioperative pain control. METHODS: A pilot observational study included patients with and without cancer undergoing lumpectomy. The convenience sample consisted of an ERAS group and a control usual care (UC) group who underwent surgery during the same time period. Discharge narcotic prescriptions were compared after converting to oral morphine milligram equivalents (MME's). Postoperative day one and week one pain scores were also compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Ninety ERAS and 67 UC patients were enrolled. Most lumpectomies were wire-localized, and half of the patients in each group had breast cancer. There were more obese patients in the ERAS group. UC lumpectomy patients were discharged with a median of 54.5 MMEs (range 0-120), while the ERAS lumpectomy patients were discharged with none (p < 0.001). Postoperative pain scores were not significantly different between groups, and there were few complications. CONCLUSION: A breast surgery-specific ERAS protocol employing opioid-sparing techniques successfully eliminated postoperative narcotic prescription without sacrificing perioperative pain control or increasing postoperative complications. By promoting the adoption of similar protocols, surgeons can continue to improve patient outcomes while decreasing the quantity of narcotics available for diversion within our patients' communities.