Literature DB >> 36197680

Association of Long-term Oncologic Prognosis With Minimal Access Breast Surgery vs Conventional Breast Surgery.

Andi Wan1, Yan Liang1, Li Chen1, Shushu Wang1, Qiyun Shi1, Wenting Yan1, Xiaozhen Cao1, Ling Zhong1, Linjun Fan1, Peng Tang1, Guozhi Zhang1, Siyi Xiong1, Cheng Wang1, Zhen Zeng1, Xiujuan Wu1, Jun Jiang1, Xiaowei Qi1, Yi Zhang1.   

Abstract

Importance: Minimal access breast surgery (MABS) has been used in breast cancer management. However, long-term prognostic data associated with MABS vs conventional breast surgery (CBS) are lacking. Objective: To investigate long-term therapeutic outcomes associated with MABS vs CBS for breast cancer management. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this single-center retrospective cohort study, 9184 individuals were assessed for inclusion. After exclusions, 2412 adult female individuals were included who were diagnosed with stage 0 to III breast cancer, underwent unilateral breast surgery between January 2004 and December 2017, and had no distant metastasis or history of severe underlying disease. Propensity score matching was performed to minimize selection bias. Data were analyzed from January 1, 2004, to December 31, 2019. Exposures: MABS or CBS. Main Outcomes and Measures: Data on demographic and tumor characteristics and long-term outcomes were collected and analyzed.
Results: This study included 2412 patients (100% female; median [IQR] age, 44 [40-49] years). Of these, 603 patients underwent MABS (endoscopic, endoscopy-assisted, or robot-assisted procedures in 289, 302, and 12 patients, respectively) and 1809 patients underwent CBS. The median follow-up time was 84 months (93 in the MABS group and 80 months in the CBS group). Intergroup differences were not significant for the following parameters: 10-year local recurrence-free survival (93.3% vs 96.3%; hazard ratio [HR], 1.39; 95% CI, 0.86-2.27; P = .18), regional recurrence-free survival (95.5% vs 96.7%; HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.81-2.36; P = .23), and distant metastasis-free survival (81.0% vs 82.0%; HR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.74-1.23; P = .72). The 5-, 10-, and 15-year disease-free survival rates in the MABS group were 85.9%, 72.6%, and 69.1%, respectively. The corresponding rates in the CBS group were 85.0%, 76.6%, and 70.7%. The intergroup differences were not significant (HR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.86-1.31; P = .55). The 5-, 10-, and 15-year overall survival rates in the MABS group were 92.0%, 83.7%, and 83.0%, respectively. The corresponding rates in the CBS group were 93.6%, 88.7%, and 81.0%. The intergroup differences were not significant (HR, 1.29; 95% CI, 0.97-1.72; P = .09). Post hoc subgroup analysis showed no significant intergroup differences in disease-free survival. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, long-term outcomes following MABS were not significantly different from those following CBS in patients with early-stage breast cancer. MABS may be a safe and feasible alternative in this patient population.

Entities:  

Year:  2022        PMID: 36197680      PMCID: PMC9535498          DOI: 10.1001/jamasurg.2022.4711

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JAMA Surg        ISSN: 2168-6254            Impact factor:   16.681


  45 in total

1.  Rare outcomes, common treatments: analytic strategies using propensity scores.

Authors:  Leonard E Braitman; Paul R Rosenbaum
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2002-10-15       Impact factor: 25.391

Review 2.  Evolution of minimal access breast surgery.

Authors:  Chi Wei Mok; Hung-Wen Lai
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2019-12

3.  Comparison of mastoscopic and conventional axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: long-term results from a randomized, multicenter trial.

Authors:  Chengyu Luo; Wenbin Guo; Jie Yang; Qiuru Sun; Wei Wei; Suhua Wu; Shubing Fang; Qingliang Zeng; Zhensheng Zhao; Fanjie Meng; Xuandong Huang; Xianlan Zhang; Ruihua Li; Xiufeng Ma; Chaoying Luo; Yun Yang
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2012-11-09       Impact factor: 7.616

4.  The feasibility of endoscopy-assisted breast conservation surgery for patients with early breast cancer.

Authors:  Hyung Seok Park; Jong Seok Lee; Jun Sang Lee; Seho Park; Seung-Il Kim; Byeong-Woo Park
Journal:  J Breast Cancer       Date:  2011-03-31       Impact factor: 3.588

Review 5.  Minimally invasive robotic breast reconstruction surgery.

Authors:  Sarah N Bishop; Jesse C Selber
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2021-01

6.  Single-Axillary-Incision Endoscopic-Assisted Hybrid Technique for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy: Technique, Preliminary Results, and Patient-Reported Cosmetic Outcome from Preliminary 50 Procedures.

Authors:  Hung-Wen Lai; Shih-Lung Lin; Shou-Tung Chen; Ka-Man Kuok; Shu-Ling Chen; Ya-Ling Lin; Dar-Ren Chen; Shou-Jen Kuo
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2018-02-26       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Preliminary results for treatment of early stage breast cancer with endoscopic subcutaneous mastectomy combined with endoscopic sentinel lymph node biopsy in China.

Authors:  Zi-Han Wang; Xiang Qu; Chang-Sheng Teng; Zhi-Cheng Ge; Hui-Ming Zhang; Zhu Yuan; Yin-Guang Gao; Can Lu; Jian-An Yu; Zhong-Tao Zhang
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-04-04       Impact factor: 3.454

8.  Minimally Invasive versus Abdominal Radical Hysterectomy for Cervical Cancer.

Authors:  Pedro T Ramirez; Michael Frumovitz; Rene Pareja; Aldo Lopez; Marcelo Vieira; Reitan Ribeiro; Alessandro Buda; Xiaojian Yan; Yao Shuzhong; Naven Chetty; David Isla; Mariano Tamura; Tao Zhu; Kristy P Robledo; Val Gebski; Rebecca Asher; Vanessa Behan; James L Nicklin; Robert L Coleman; Andreas Obermair
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2018-10-31       Impact factor: 91.245

9.  Time-varying effects of prognostic factors associated with long-term survival in breast cancer.

Authors:  Minlu Zhang; Peng Peng; Kai Gu; Hui Cai; Guoyou Qin; Xiao Ou Shu; Pingping Bao
Journal:  Endocr Relat Cancer       Date:  2018-02-22       Impact factor: 5.678

10.  Ten-year follow up of cosmetic outcome, overall survival, and disease-free survival in endoscope-assisted partial mastectomy with filling of dead space using absorbable mesh for stage ≤ IIA breast cancer: comparison with conventional conservative method.

Authors:  Nobuyuki Takemoto; Ai Koyanagi; Hiroshi Yamamoto
Journal:  BMC Womens Health       Date:  2021-06-24       Impact factor: 2.809

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.