Literature DB >> 35583693

Surgical and Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic and Conventional Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction: International Multicenter Pooled Data Analysis.

Hyung Seok Park1, Jeea Lee2, Hung-Wen Lai3,4,5, Jung Mi Park6, Jai Min Ryu7, Jeong Eon Lee7, Jee Ye Kim1, Emilia Marrazzo8, Alessandra Margherita De Scalzi9, Giovanni Corso9,10, Filippo Montemurro11, Guglielmo Gazzetta11, Giada Pozzi11, Antonio Toesca12.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy (RNSM) has been developed to reduce conspicuous scar and increase the quality of life in women. This study aimed to evaluate the surgical and oncologic outcomes of RNSM with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) compared with conventional nipple-sparing mastectomy (CNSM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This international multicenter, pooled analysis of individual patient-level data enrolled a total of 755 procedures in 659 women (609 had breast cancer and 50 underwent risk-reducing mastectomy) who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy with IBR. Surgical and oncologic outcomes, including 30-days postoperative (POD 30d) complication rate, nipple necrosis rate, grade of Clavien-Dindo classification, disease-free survival, and overall survival, were evaluated. Propensity score-matched analyses were performed to adjust for confounding factors.
RESULTS: The median age of both the RNSM and CNSM groups was 45 years. The RNSM group had lower body mass index (BMI) and a higher proportion of benign disease compared with the CNSM group. POD 30d complications and postoperative complication grade III rates were lower in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (p < 0.05). The nipple necrosis rate was 2.2% and 7.8% for RNSM and CNSM, respectively (p = 0.002). After propensity score matching, significantly lower rates of POD 30d complications, nipple necrosis, and postoperative complication grade III occurred in the RNSM group than in the CNSM group (all p < 0.05). Oncologic outcomes were not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: RNSM can provide better cosmetic results with favorable surgical and oncologic outcomes for women with early breast cancer or BRCA mutation.
© 2022. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35583693     DOI: 10.1245/s10434-022-11865-x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol        ISSN: 1068-9265            Impact factor:   4.339


  33 in total

Review 1.  Multiple imputation: a primer.

Authors:  J L Schafer
Journal:  Stat Methods Med Res       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 3.021

2.  Update on the Feasibility and Progress on Robotic Breast Surgery.

Authors:  Antonio Toesca; Alessandra Invento; Giulia Massari; Antonia Girardi; Nickolas Peradze; Germana Lissidini; Claudia Sangalli; Patrick Maisonneuve; Andrea Manconi; Alessandra Gottardi; Jennifer L Baker; Luca Bottiglieri; Paola Naninato; Gabriel Farante; Francesca Magnoni; Alessandra De Scalzi; Giovanni Corso; Marco Colleoni; Francesca De Lorenzi; Virgilio Sacchini; Viviana Galimberti; Mattia Intra; Mario Rietjens; Paolo Veronesi
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2019-07-24       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Robotic nipple-sparing mastectomy for the treatment of breast cancer: Feasibility and safety study.

Authors:  Antonio Toesca; Nickolas Peradze; Andrea Manconi; Viviana Galimberti; Mattia Intra; Marco Colleoni; Bernardo Bonanni; Giuseppe Curigliano; Mario Rietjens; Giuseppe Viale; Virgilio Sacchini; Paolo Veronesi
Journal:  Breast       Date:  2016-11-02       Impact factor: 4.380

4.  Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction with Gel Implant: Technique, Preliminary Results and Patient-Reported Cosmetic Outcome.

Authors:  Hung-Wen Lai; Shou-Tung Chen; Shih-Lung Lin; Chih-Jung Chen; Ya-Ling Lin; Shu-Hsin Pai; Dar-Ren Chen; Shou-Jen Kuo
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-08-14       Impact factor: 5.344

5.  Robotic versus conventional nipple sparing mastectomy and immediate gel implant breast reconstruction in the management of breast cancer- A case control comparison study with analysis of clinical outcome, medical cost, and patient-reported cosmetic results.

Authors:  Hung-Wen Lai; Shou-Tung Chen; Chi Wei Mok; Ying-Jen Lin; Hwa-Koon Wu; Shih-Lung Lin; Dar-Ren Chen; Shou-Jen Kuo
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2020-02-18       Impact factor: 2.740

6.  Robot-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An initial Experience of the Korea Robot-endoscopy Minimal Access Breast Surgery Study Group (KoREa-BSG).

Authors:  Jai Min Ryu; Jee Ye Kim; Hee Jun Choi; BeomSeok Ko; Jisun Kim; Jihyoung Cho; Moo Hyun Lee; Jung Eun Choi; Joo Heung Kim; Jeea Lee; Sung Mi Jung; Hyuk Jai Shin; Jeeyeon Lee; Hyung Seok Park
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2020-09-15       Impact factor: 13.787

7.  Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey.

Authors:  Daniel Dindo; Nicolas Demartines; Pierre-Alain Clavien
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 12.969

8.  A comparison of different methods to handle missing data in the context of propensity score analysis.

Authors:  Jungyeon Choi; Olaf M Dekkers; Saskia le Cessie
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2018-10-19       Impact factor: 8.082

9.  Robot-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An Initial Experience.

Authors:  Hyung Seok Park; Jeea Lee; Dong Won Lee; Seung Yong Song; Dae Hyun Lew; Seung Il Kim; Young Up Cho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2019-10-30       Impact factor: 4.379

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.