Literature DB >> 24698963

Prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy leaves more terminal duct lobular units in situ as compared with skin-sparing mastectomy.

Victorien M T van Verschuer1, Carolien H M van Deurzen, Pieter J Westenend, Joost Rothbarth, Cornelis Verhoef, Ernest J T Luiten, Marian B E Menke-Pluijmers, Linetta B Koppert.   

Abstract

Prophylactic skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) is associated with major breast cancer risk reduction in high-risk patients. In prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) it is unknown how many terminal duct lobular units (TDLUs) remain behind the nipple-areola complex (NAC) additionally to those behind the skin flap. Therefore, safety of NSM can be doubted. We compared amounts of TDLUs behind the NAC as compared with the skin. In prophylactic SSM and conventional therapeutic mastectomy patients, the NAC and an adjacent skin island (SI) were resected as if it were an NSM. NAC and SI were serially sectioned perpendicularly to the skin and analyzed for the amount of TDLUs present. Slides of NAC and SI were scanned, and slide surface areas (cm) were measured. TDLUs/cm in NAC versus SI specimen, representing TDLU density, were analyzed pairwise. In total, 105 NACs and SIs of 90 women were analyzed. Sixty-four NACs (61%) versus 25 SIs (24%) contained ≥1 TDLUs. Median TDLU density was higher in NAC specimens (0.2 TDLUs/cm) as compared with SI specimens (0.0 TDLUs/cm; P<0.01). Independent risk factors for the presence of TDLUs in the NAC specimen were younger age and parity (vs. nulliparity). The finding of higher TDLU density behind the NAC as compared with the skin flap suggests that sparing the NAC in prophylactic NSM in high-risk patients possibly may increase postoperative breast cancer risk as compared with prophylactic SSM. Studies with long-term follow-up after NSM are warranted to estimate the level of residual risk.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24698963     DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000000180

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  5 in total

Review 1.  Oncological safety of prophylactic breast surgery: skin-sparing and nipple-sparing versus total mastectomy.

Authors:  Victorien M T van Verschuer; Marike C Maijers; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Linetta B Koppert
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2015-12

2.  MRI-based quantification of residual fibroglandular tissue of the breast after conservative mastectomies.

Authors:  Ramona Woitek; Georg Pfeiler; Alex Farr; Panagiotis Kapetas; Julia Furtner; Maria Bernathova; Veronika Schöpf; Paola Clauser; Maria A Marino; Katja Pinker; Pascal A Baltzer; Thomas H Helbich
Journal:  Eur J Radiol       Date:  2018-04-26       Impact factor: 3.528

3.  Use of bilateral prophylactic nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with high risk of breast cancer.

Authors:  M G Valero; T-A Moo; S Muhsen; E C Zabor; M Stempel; A Pusic; M L Gemignani; M Morrow; V Sacchini
Journal:  Br J Surg       Date:  2020-05-20       Impact factor: 6.939

4.  The PreQ-20 TRIAL: A prospective cohort study of the oncologic safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes of patients undergoing prepectoral breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Benigno Acea-Nebril; Alejandra García-Novoa; Lourdes García Jiménez
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-07-14       Impact factor: 3.752

5.  Evolving indications and long-term oncological outcomes of risk-reducing bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy.

Authors:  S R Grobmyer; H J Pederson; S A Valente; Z Al-Hilli; D Radford; R Djohan; R Yetman; C Eng; J P Crowe
Journal:  BJS Open       Date:  2018-11-26
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.