Literature DB >> 11920520

Incidence of the superficial fascia and its relevance in skin-sparing mastectomy.

Gertrude M Beer1, Zsuzsanna Varga, Srecko Budi, Burkhardt Seifert, Viktor E Meyer.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: With the move away from classical radical mastectomy to ever more skin-sparing procedures, there has been an ongoing discussion about how much skin and subcutaneous tissue should be resected to perform an adequate mastectomy while leaving viable skin flaps. One of the common recommendations is to dissect just superficial to the superficial layer (SL) of the superficial fascia of the breast. This, in turn, has revived the old, unsolved controversy about the existence or absence of the SL, a fascia that reportedly encloses the mammary gland ventrally. In skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM), which combine tumor resection with immediate breast reconstruction, the ideal would be to create skin flaps that are thin enough to remove all breast tissue but at the same time are thick enough to preserve flap circulation. The feasibility of meeting these two goals simultaneously and the possible role and relevance of the SL as a guide to dissection in SSM was examined in this study.
METHODS: Sixty-two breast resection specimens from 31 women who underwent breast reduction were examined histologically to determine whether the SL was present, whether breast tissue could be detected within or beyond this SL, the measured distance between the caudal border of the dermis and the SL or the breast tissue, and whether the thickness of the subcutaneous fat layer was correlated with the patients' physical data, such as body weight or body mass index (BMI).
RESULTS: The SL was absent in 44% of resection specimens. When the SL was present, 42% of specimens contained several islands of breast tissue within the SL. No breast tissue was found beyond the SL. The minimal distance between the SL and the dermis varied from 0.2 mm to 4.0 mm; the minimal distance between the breast tissue and the dermis was 0.4 mm. In 50% of specimens, the minimal distance between the dermis and the SL or breast tissue was < 1.1 mm. A distance of > or = 5 mm was encountered in only 17% of specimens, and a distance of > or = 10 mm was encountered in only 5% of specimens. No significant correlation between the right and left breast was found with any of the parameters examined. A weak negative correlation was seen between the BMI and the mean thickness of the subcutaneous fat (P = 0.049; correlation coefficient [r] = -0.39; Spearman rank correlation).
CONCLUSIONS: Histologic evaluation revealed that the SL is not present in all breasts and, thus, cannot serve as a reliable plane of dissection. Furthermore, if the SL is present microscopically, then it often is too thin and delicate to be detectable macroscopically. Finally, even if the SL is present and visible macroscopically, the distance to the overlying skin is so small in the majority of patients that a dissection superficial to the SL would not leave viable skin flaps in skin-sparing mastectomies. Copyright 2002 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 11920520     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.10429

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  15 in total

Review 1.  Anatomy relevant to conservative mastectomy.

Authors:  Rachel L O'Connell; Jennifer E Rusby
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-12

Review 2.  Skin-sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  Eduardo G González; Alberto O Rancati
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-12

Review 3.  Strategies and considerations in selecting between subpectoral and prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Ara A Salibian; Jordan D Frey; Nolan S Karp
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-02

4.  Identifying the dissection plane for mastectomy-description and visualization of our technique.

Authors:  Camilla Bille; Farima Dalaei; Jørn Bo Thomsen
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-10

5.  Skin-sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction is an oncologically safe procedure.

Authors:  Bernd Gerber; Annette Krause; Toralf Reimer; Heiner Müller; Ingrid Küchenmeister; Joseph Makovitzky; Günther Kundt; Klaus Friese
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2003-07       Impact factor: 12.969

6.  The superficial margin of the skin-sparing mastectomy for breast carcinoma: factors predicting involvement and efficacy of additional margin sampling.

Authors:  Dengfeng Cao; Theodore N Tsangaris; Nina Kouprina; Lee Shun-Fune Wu; Charles M Balch; Russell Vang; Pedram Argani
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2008-02-02       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 7.  Pattern of local recurrence after mastectomy and reconstruction in breast cancer patients: a systematic review.

Authors:  Ji Hyeon Joo; Yongkan Ki; Wontaek Kim; Jiho Nam; Donghyun Kim; Jongmoo Park; Hyun Yul Kim; Youn Joo Jung; Ki Seok Choo; Kyung Jin Nam; Su Bong Nam
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-06

8.  Technical advances in skin sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  Grant W Carlson
Journal:  Int J Surg Oncol       Date:  2011-04-28

9.  Direct to Implant Reconstruction in Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: Patient Selection by Preoperative Digital Mammogram.

Authors:  Alberto O Rancati; Claudio H Angrigiani; Dennis C Hammond; Maurizio B Nava; Eduardo G Gonzalez; Julio C Dorr; Gustavo F Gercovich; Nicola Rocco; Roman L Rostagno
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2017-06-20

10.  Mastectomy Flap Thickness and Complications in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Objective Evaluation using Magnetic Resonance Imaging.

Authors:  Jordan D Frey; Ara A Salibian; Mihye Choi; Nolan S Karp
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2017-08-08
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.