J Bong1, J Parker, R Clapper, W Dooley. 1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Institute for Breast Health, The University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, Oklahoma City, OK, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic mastopexy has been popularized as a method to hide the cosmetic effects of central or large-volume resections associated with breast conservation surgery for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review was undertaken to study the uses and limitations of these techniques in providing adequate breast conservation lumpectomy for breast cancer of any stage in a single surgeon's practice. A review of breast cancer cases March 2004 through December 2009 were analyzed for the use of oncoplastic reconstruction in breast conservation surgery. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients had lumpectomies during this period associated with oncoplastic mastopexy reconstruction. The average age was 55.6 years with a range of 33-85 years. Stage 0 breast cancer accounted for 33 cases (19.8%), and 134 cases were invasive cancers stages 1-3 (stage 1, 34.1%; stage 2, 30.6%; and stage 3, 15.6%). The most common oncoplastic techniques used were, in order of frequency: batwing mastopexy, parallelogram mastopexy, and Modified Wise pattern mastopexy. Positive or close margins (≤ 2 mm) were present in 37 of 167 cases (22%). Positive margins were most associated with higher stage, positive nodes, positive lymphovascular invasion (LVI), use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and larger initial T stage, positive estrogen receptor (ER), and younger age. Of these higher stage, node positive, and use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were statistically significant in this small series (P values = 0.034, 0.016, and 0.022, respectively). Ki-67 and HER2 status were not associated with positive margins. Positive margins were manageable by local re-excision of a solitary face of the prior resection wall in more than 2/3 of cases to achieve negative pathologic margins. Only 11 of 167 required mastectomy because of failure to achieve adequate margins for oncologic control. CONCLUSIONS: Oncoplastic mastopexy allows the surgeon to address large tumors or tumors in cosmetically difficult sites adequately for breast conservation. Careful margin marking and re-excision of close or positive margins is still often feasible to achieve adequate negative margin with acceptable cosmesis in spite of the large initial volumes of resection.
BACKGROUND: Oncoplastic mastopexy has been popularized as a method to hide the cosmetic effects of central or large-volume resections associated with breast conservation surgery for breast cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This review was undertaken to study the uses and limitations of these techniques in providing adequate breast conservation lumpectomy for breast cancer of any stage in a single surgeon's practice. A review of breast cancer cases March 2004 through December 2009 were analyzed for the use of oncoplastic reconstruction in breast conservation surgery. RESULTS: A total of 167 patients had lumpectomies during this period associated with oncoplastic mastopexy reconstruction. The average age was 55.6 years with a range of 33-85 years. Stage 0 breast cancer accounted for 33 cases (19.8%), and 134 cases were invasive cancers stages 1-3 (stage 1, 34.1%; stage 2, 30.6%; and stage 3, 15.6%). The most common oncoplastic techniques used were, in order of frequency: batwing mastopexy, parallelogram mastopexy, and Modified Wise pattern mastopexy. Positive or close margins (≤ 2 mm) were present in 37 of 167 cases (22%). Positive margins were most associated with higher stage, positive nodes, positive lymphovascular invasion (LVI), use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and larger initial T stage, positive estrogen receptor (ER), and younger age. Of these higher stage, node positive, and use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy were statistically significant in this small series (P values = 0.034, 0.016, and 0.022, respectively). Ki-67 and HER2 status were not associated with positive margins. Positive margins were manageable by local re-excision of a solitary face of the prior resection wall in more than 2/3 of cases to achieve negative pathologic margins. Only 11 of 167 required mastectomy because of failure to achieve adequate margins for oncologic control. CONCLUSIONS: Oncoplastic mastopexy allows the surgeon to address large tumors or tumors in cosmetically difficult sites adequately for breast conservation. Careful margin marking and re-excision of close or positive margins is still often feasible to achieve adequate negative margin with acceptable cosmesis in spite of the large initial volumes of resection.
Authors: I G Papanikolaou; C Dimitrakakis; F Zagouri; S Marinopoulos; A Giannos; E Zografos; C G Zografos; D Kritikou; A Rodolakis; G C Zografos; D Loutradis Journal: Breast Cancer Date: 2019-04-06 Impact factor: 4.239
Authors: Russell J Bramhall; Jason Lee; Mae Concepcion; David Westbroek; Sarah Huf; Kabir Mohammed; Paul Thiruchelvam; Gerald P Gui Journal: Gland Surg Date: 2017-12