Cirugía mayor ambulatoria del cáncer de mama: factores relacionados con la conversión a hospitalización convencional / Major ambulatory surgery for the treatment of breast cancer: Factors conditioning conversion to conventional hospitalization

Introducción: La realización de cirugía oncológica mamaria en régimen ambulatorio se está convirtiendo en una práctica estándar entre los centros públicos por los distintos beneficios que aporta. En este estudio se analizan los resultados obtenidos con esta modalidad asistencial y se identifican los factores relacionados con su fracaso. Métodos: Se analizaron retrospectivamente los datos de las 206 pacientes intervenidas por cáncer de mama en el año 2016 bajo 3 tipos de régimen: ambulatorio puro, ambulatorio-23 h y hospitalario convencional. Se describen los índices de ambulatorización, éxito y conversión, tanto de forma global como distinguiendo entre cirugía conservadora, mastectomía ± reconstrucción inmediata y cirugía axilar. Se realiza un análisis univariante para hallar aquellos factores relacionados con la conversión a régimen hospitalario. Resultados: Para la muestra global se obtuvo un índice de ambulatorización del 61,2%, con un 16,5% de conversiones y un éxito del 83,4%. Para cirugía conservadora, ambulatorización, éxito y conversión fueron del 78,8, el 88,6 y el 11,4%, respectivamente. En las mastectomías la ambulatorización fue del 28,6%, con un 37,1% de conversión y un éxito del 62,9%. Las 11 cirugías axilares culminaron en régimen ambulatorio. Los factores asociados a una mayor probabilidad de conversión fueron la realización de mastectomía frente a cirugía conservadora y la aparición de complicaciones postoperatorias. Conclusiones: La cirugía del cáncer de mama en régimen ambulatorio es factible y segura. Para la optimización de resultados resultan imprescindibles la cuidadosa selección de las candidatas y el desarrollo de una técnica quirúrgica cuidadosa y lo más conservadora posible

Introduction: The main step in curative treatment for breast cancer is surgery. Its use in an ambulatory setting can contribute towards more efficient healthcare, providing additional benefits for patients. In this study, we analyze the results obtained with this treatment method and identify factors related with conversion to hospitalization.Methods: Results were analyzed from the 206 surgeries performed for breast cancer in 2016, using three different methods: day surgery, overnight ambulatory (23h) and conventional hospitalization. The ambulatory success and conversion rates were calculated for the global sample and stratified, distinguishing between conservative surgery, mastectomy and axillary surgery. A univariate analysis was performed to identify the factors involved in conversion. Results: For the global sample, the ambulatory surgery rate was 61.2%, 16.5% conversions and a success rate of 83.4%. For conservative surgery, ambulatory, success and conversion rates were 78.8%, 88.6 and 11.4%, respectively. For mastectomies, the ambulatory rate was 28.6%, with 62.9% success and 37.1% conversions. The 11 axillary surgeries were performed as day surgeries. Factors associated with conversion were mastectomy vs. vs. conservative surgery and the appearance of postoperative complications. Conclusions: Ambulatory surgery for the surgical treatment of breast cancer should be standard care. Optimized results require adequate patient selection and the performance of surgical technique that needs to be as careful and as conservative as possible

Major ambulatory surgery for the treatment of breast cancer: Factors conditioning conversion to conventional hospitalization. / Cirugía mayor ambulatoria del cáncer de mama: factores relacionados con la conversión a hospitalización convencional.

INTRODUCTION: The main step in curative treatment for breast cancer is surgery. Its use in an ambulatory setting can contribute towards more efficient healthcare, providing additional benefits for patients. In this study, we analyze the results obtained with this treatment method and identify factors related with conversion to hospitalization. METHODS: Results were analyzed from the 206 surgeries performed for breast cancer in 2016, using three different methods: day surgery, overnight ambulatory (23h) and conventional hospitalization. The ambulatory success and conversion rates were calculated for the global sample and stratified, distinguishing between conservative surgery, mastectomy and axillary surgery. A univariate analysis was performed to identify the factors involved in conversion. RESULTS: For the global sample, the ambulatory surgery rate was 61.2%, 16.5% conversions and a success rate of 83.4%. For conservative surgery, ambulatory, success and conversion rates were 78.8%, 88.6 and 11.4%, respectively. For mastectomies, the ambulatory rate was 28.6%, with 62.9% success and 37.1% conversions. The 11 axillary surgeries were performed as day surgeries. Factors associated with conversion were mastectomy vs. vs. conservative surgery and the appearance of postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: Ambulatory surgery for the surgical treatment of breast cancer should be standard care. Optimized results require adequate patient selection and the performance of surgical technique that needs to be as careful and as conservative as possible.

Radioterapia intraoperatoria de la mama con Intrabeam®: experiencia inicial en nuestro centro / Intraoperative radiotherapy of the breast with Intrabeam®: initial experience at our center

Objetivo. La intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT, «radioterapia intraoperatoria») en pacientes seleccionadas con cáncer de mama permite un tratamiento corto y preciso durante la cirugía conservadora sobre el lecho tumoral in situ. Presentamos nuestra experiencia inicial de IORT con dispositivo Intrabeam®. Pacientes y métodos. Se seleccionaron inicialmente 120 pacientes con cáncer de mama para IORT con Intrabeam® según protocolo TARGIT-A, desde enero de 2013 hasta febrero de 2015. Las indicaciones fueron: candidatas a cirugía conservadora, mayores de 45 años, diagnóstico histológico de carcinoma ductal infiltrante≤3cm hormonodependiente y axila clínica, ecográfica e histológicamente negativa. Resultados. De las pacientes seleccionadas, 34 (28%) no recibieron IORT debido al tamaño de la cavidad quirúrgica (28 casos) o problemas técnicos (6 casos). Finalmente, 86 pacientes (72%) recibieron IORT. La edad media fue de 64 años (DE±8,4). En 22 pacientes (26%) fue preciso administrar radioterapia externa a toda la mama. Trece pacientes (15%) tuvieron complicaciones: 3 casos de seroma que precisaron de más de 3 punciones para resolución (4%), 6 casos de absceso-mastitis (7%), 2 casos de hematoma (2%) y 2 casos de dehiscencia parcial de la herida quirúrgica (2%). No hubo toxicidad grave (grado iii-iv). El resultado estético fue bueno o muy bueno en el 87% de las pacientes (75). Conclusión. La IORT con Intrabeam® es una alternativa segura y bien tolerada frente a la radioterapia externa en pacientes seleccionadas, con un buen resultado estético a corto plazo (AU)

Objective. Intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) in selected patients with breast cancer allows a short and precise treatment on the tumor bed in situ during conservative surgery. We present our initial experience of IORT with the Intrabeam® device. Patients and methods. From January 2013 to February 2015, 120 patients with breast cancer were pre-selected for IORT with Intrabeam® according to the TARGIT-A protocol. The indications were as follows: candidates for conservative surgery, age older than 45 years, a histological diagnosis of hormone-dependent infiltrating ductal carcinoma≤3cm and absence of axillary involvement on physical, ultrasound and histological examination. Results. Among the selected patients, 34 (28%) did not receive IORT due to the size of the surgical cavity (28 patients) or technical problems (6 patients). Finally, 86 patients (72%) received IORT. The average age was 64 years (SD±8.4). In 22 patients (26%), it was necessary to administer external beam radiotherapy to the whole breast. Thirteen patients (15%) had complications: 3 cases of seroma requiring more than 3 attempts for resolution (4%), 6 cases of abscess-mastitis (7%), 2 cases of hematoma (2%) and 2 cases of partial dehiscence of the surgical wound (2%). There was no severe toxicity (grade iii-iv). The aesthetic result was good or very good in 87% of the patients (n=75). Conclusion. IORT with Intrabeam® is a safe and well tolerated alternative versus external radiotherapy in selected patients and provides a good short-term aesthetic result (AU)