Literature DB >> 28350649

Oncoplastic Breast Reduction Technique and Outcomes: An Evolution over 20 Years.

Albert Losken1,2, Alexandra M Hart1,2, Justine S Broecker1,2, Toncred M Styblo1,2, Grant W Carlson1,2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Reduction mammaplasty at the time of lumpectomy is a good option in women with breast cancer and macromastia. We critically evaluated refinements and outcomes of this technique.
METHODS: A prospectively maintained database was reviewed of all women with breast cancer who received lumpectomy and reduction mammaplasty at our institution from 1994 to 2015. Patients' demographics were reviewed. Preoperative and postoperative patient satisfaction (BREAST-Q) was determined. Comparisons were made between early and recent cases.
RESULTS: There were 353 patients included. Average age was 54 (range, 21 to 80 years), with the largest number having stage I disease [n = 107 of 246 (43.5 percent)]. Average lumpectomy specimen was 207 g (range, 11.6 to 1954 g) and total reduction weight averaged 545 g (range, 21 to 4102 g). Tumor size averaged 2.02 cm (range, 0.00 to 15.60 cm). The positive margin rate was 6.2 percent (n = 22). Completion mastectomy rate was 9.9 percent (n = 35). Overall complication rate was 16 percent. The recurrence rate was 5.2 percent (n = 10 of 192) at a mean follow-up of 2 years (range, 2 months to 15 years). Resection weights greater than 1000 g were associated with having a positive margin (16.7 percent versus 5.0 percent; p = 0.016), and tended to be associated with having a completion mastectomy (p = 0.069). Positive margin and completion mastectomy rates have been lower in the past 10 years. Over 1 year postoperatively, women reported increased self-confidence (p = 0.020), feelings of attractiveness (p = 0.085), emotional health (p = 0.037), and satisfaction with sex life (p = 0.092).
CONCLUSIONS: The oncoplastic reduction technique is effective and results in improved patient-reported outcomes. Resections over 1000 g are associated with a higher incidence of positive margins and may increase the risk for completion mastectomy. Outcomes have improved with experience and refinement in technique.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 28350649     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000003226

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  11 in total

Review 1.  Update of the American Society of Breast Surgeons Toolbox to address the lumpectomy reoperation epidemic.

Authors:  Maureen P McEvoy; Jeffrey Landercasper; Himani R Naik; Sheldon Feldman
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2018-12

Review 2.  Oncoplastic partial breast reconstruction: concepts and techniques.

Authors:  Carrie K Chu; Summer E Hanson; Rosa F Hwang; Liza C Wu
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-01

3.  [Application of three-pedicle reduction mammaplasty in breast cancer patients with moderate or greater breast hypertrophy and/or moderate-to-severe breast ptosis].

Authors:  Yu Feng; Juan Li; Donglin Zhang; Jiao Zhou; Xiangquan Qin; Xiran Liu; Mengxue Qiu; Huanzuo Yang; Zhenggui Du
Journal:  Zhongguo Xiu Fu Chong Jian Wai Ke Za Zhi       Date:  2021-12-15

Review 4.  Surgical trends in breast cancer: a rise in novel operative treatment options over a 12 year analysis.

Authors:  Michael M Jonczyk; Jolie Jean; Roger Graham; Abhishek Chatterjee
Journal:  Breast Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2018-10-25       Impact factor: 4.872

5.  Assessment of breast symmetry in breast cancer patients undergoing therapeutic mammaplasty using the Breast Cancer Conservation Therapy cosmetic results software (BCCT.core).

Authors:  Reuben Vella Baldacchino; Annalise Bellizzi; Rudo N Madada-Nyakauru; Fawz Kazzazi; Georgette Oni; Parto Forouhi; Charles M Malata
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-06

6.  Cosmetic Outcomes and Symmetry Comparison in Patients Undergoing Bilateral Therapeutic Mammoplasty for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  K Gulis; L Rydén; P O Bendahl; T Svensjö
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.352

7.  Incidence and Outcomes of Completion Mastectomy following Oncoplastic Reduction: A Case Series.

Authors:  Nusaiba F Baker; Ciara A Brown; Toncred M Styblo; Grant W Carlson; Albert Losken
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-03-02

8.  Comparative study of surgical and oncological outcomes in oncoplastic versus non oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for breast cancer treatment.

Authors:  Natalie R Almeida; Fabrício P Brenelli; Cesar C Dos Santos; Renato Z Torresan; Júlia Y Shinzato; Cassio Cardoso-Filho; Giuliano M Duarte; Nicoli S de Azevedo; Luiz Carlos Zeferino
Journal:  JPRAS Open       Date:  2021-06-06

9.  Surgical Predictive Model for Breast Cancer Patients Assessing Acute Postoperative Complications: The Breast Cancer Surgery Risk Calculator.

Authors:  Michael M Jonczyk; Carla Suzanne Fisher; Russell Babbitt; Jessica K Paulus; Karen M Freund; Brian Czerniecki; Julie A Margenthaler; Albert Losken; Abhishek Chatterjee
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 4.339

10.  Therapeutic Mammoplasty and Dermal Flap: A Novel Hybrid Approach for Chest Wall Reconstruction.

Authors:  Haitham H Khalil; Maninder Kalkat
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2020-03-25
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.