Reply: Breast Surgery in the Time of Global Pandemic: Benefits of Same-Day Surgery for Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction during COVID-19.
Reply: Breast Surgery in the Time of Global Pandemic: Benefits of Same-Day Surgery for Breast Cancer Patients Undergoing Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction during COVID-19.
Project description:BackgroundSeveral studies reported the feasibility and safety of robotic-NSM (R-NSM). The aim of our prospective study was to compare R-NSM and conventional-NSM (C-NSM).MethodsWe analyzed patients who were operated on with and without robotic assistance (R-NSM or C-NSM) and who received immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) with implant or latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). The main objective was complication rate and secondary aims were post-operative length of hospitalization (POLH), duration of surgery, and cost.ResultsWe analyzed 87 R-NSM and 142 C-NSM with implant-IBR in 50 and 135 patients, with LDF-IBR in 37 and 7 patients, respectively. Higher durations of surgery and costs were observed for R-NSM, without a difference in POLH and interval time to adjuvant therapy between R-NSM and C-NSM. In the multivariate analysis, R-NSM was not associated with a higher breast complication rate (OR=0.608) and significant factors were breast cup-size, LDF combined with implant-IBR, tobacco and inversed-T incision. Grade 2-3 breast complications rate were 13% for R-NSM and 17.3% for C-NSM, significantly higher for LDF combined with implant-IBR, areolar/radial incisions and BMI>=30. A predictive score was calculated (AUC=0.754). In logistic regression, patient's satisfaction between C-NSM and R-NSM were not significantly different, with unfavorable results for BMI >=25 (OR=2.139), NSM for recurrence (OR=5.371) and primary breast cancer with radiotherapy (OR=4.533). A predictive score was calculated. In conclusion, our study confirms the comparable clinical outcome between C- NSM and R-NSM, in the price of longer surgery and higher cost for R-NSM. Predictive scores of breast complications and satisfaction were significantly associated with factors known in the pre-operative period.
Project description:BackgroundPatients often ask about the time taken to return to activities of daily living (ADLs) after breast surgery, but there is a lack of data to give accurate guidance. We aimed to assess the feasibility of a study to determine the time taken to return to ADLs after mastectomy with or without breast reconstruction.Materials and methodsA prospective multicentre, self-reported questionnaire-based feasibility study of women who had undergone mastectomy ± reconstruction was performed, between Jan 2017 and Dec 2019. Women were asked to self-report when they returned to 15 ADLs with a 5-option time scale for "return to activity."ResultsThe questionnaire was returned by 42 patients (median [range] age: 64 [31-84]). Of these, 22 had simple mastectomy, seven mastectomy and implant reconstruction, seven mastectomy and autologous reconstruction (DIEP), and six did not specify. Overall, over 90% could manage stairs and brush hair by two weeks and 84% could get in and out of the bath by four weeks. By 1-2 months, 92% could do their own shopping and 86% could drive. 68% of women employed returned to work within four months. Compared to simple mastectomy, patients undergoing reconstruction took a longer time to return to getting in/out of bath (<2 vs. 2-4 weeks), vacuuming (2-4 weeks vs. 1-2 months), and fitness (1-2 vs. 3-4 months). There was a slower return to shopping (1-2 months vs. 2-4 weeks), driving and work (both 3-4 vs. 1-2 months), and sports (3-4 vs. 1-2 months) in autologous reconstruction compared to implant reconstruction.ConclusionThis study is feasible. It highlights slower return to specific activities (particularly strength-based) in reconstruction patients, slower in autologous compared with implant reconstruction. The impact on return to ADLs should be discussed as part of the preoperative counselling as it will inform patients and help guide their decision making. A larger study is required to confirm these results.
Project description:BackgroundOur center proposes a new technique that effectively provides space to broaden the surgical field of view and overcomes the limitations of endoscopy-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (E-NSM) by changing the dissection sequence and combining it with air inflation. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes of the new technique designated "reverse-sequence endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (R-E-NSM) with subpectoral breast reconstruction (SBR)" and the conventional E-NSM (C-E-NSM) with SBR.MethodAll patients undergoing E-NSM with SBR at our breast center between April 2017 and December 2022 were included in this study. The cohort was divided into the C-E-NSM group and the R-E-NSM group. The operation time, anesthesia time, medical cost, complications, cosmetic outcomes, and oncological safety were compared.ResultsTwenty-six and seventy-nine consecutive patients were included in the C-E-NSM and R-E-NSM groups, with average ages of 36.9 ± 7.0 years and 39.7 ± 8.4 years (P=0.128). Patients in the R-E-NSM group had significantly shorter operation time (204.6 ± 59.2 vs. 318.9 ± 75.5 minutes, p<0.001) and anesthesia time (279.4 ± 83.9 vs. 408.9 ± 87.4 minutes, p<0.001) and decreased medical costs [5063.4 (4439.6-6532.3) vs. 6404.2 (5152.5-7981.5), USD, p=0.001] and increase SCAR-Q scores (77.2 ± 17.1 vs. 68.8 ± 8.7, P=0.002) compared to the C-E-NSM group. Although trends increased in both the excellent rate of Ueda scores (53.8% vs. 42.3%, P = 0.144), excellent rate of Harris scores (44.0% vs. 63.1%, P=0.102), and decreased surgical complications (7.6% vs. 19.2%, P = 0.135) were observed in the R-E-NSM group, the differences were not significant. There were no significant differences in oncological outcomes between the two groups.ConclusionR-E-NSM improves cosmetic outcomes and efficiency of C-E-NSM, reduces medical costs, and has a trend of lower surgical complications while maintaining the safety of oncology. It is a safe and feasible option for oncological procedures that deserves to be promoted and widely adopted in practice.
Project description:BackgroundIn this 2-site randomized trial, we investigated the effect of antiseptic drain care on bacterial colonization of surgical drains and infection after immediate prosthetic breast reconstruction.MethodsWith IRB approval, we randomized patients undergoing bilateral mastectomy and reconstruction to drain antisepsis (treatment) for one side, with standard drain care (control) for the other. Antisepsis care included both: chlorhexidine disc dressing at drain exit site(s) and irrigation of drain bulbs twice daily with dilute sodium hypochlorite solution. Cultures were obtained from bulb fluid at 1 week and at drain removal, and from the subcutaneous drain tubing at removal. Positive cultures were defined as ≥1+ growth for fluid and >50 CFU for tubing.ResultsCultures of drain bulb fluid at 1 week (the primary endpoint) were positive in 9.9 % of treatment sides (10 of 101) versus 20.8 % (21 of 101) of control sides (p = 0.02). Drain tubing cultures were positive in 0 treated drains versus 6.2 % (6 of 97) of control drains (p = 0.03). Surgical site infection occurred within 30 days in 0 antisepsis sides versus 3.8 % (4 of 104) of control sides (p = 0.13), and within 1 year in three of 104 (2.9 %) of antisepsis sides versus 6 of 104 (5.8 %) of control sides (p = 0.45). Clinical infection occurred within 1 year in 9.7 % (6 of 62) of colonized sides (tubing or fluid) versus 1.5 % (2 of 136) of noncolonized sides (p = 0.03).ConclusionsSimple and inexpensive local antiseptic interventions with a chlorhexidine disc and hypochlorite solution reduce bacterial colonization of drains, and reduced drain colonization was associated with fewer infections.
Project description:The risk of surgical site infection (SSI) for breast surgery in patients without additional risk factors is low, below 5%. Evidence shows the risk of SSI is significantly elevated in patients undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). However, there is no consensus regarding the use of extended antibiotic prophylaxis. We aim to determine the effect of extended antibiotic prophylaxis on the incidence of SSI after IBR. Methods:PubMed and Scopus were searched by 2 independent reviewers. Data abstracted included types of study, basic characteristics, detailed antibiotic prophylaxis information, SSI event, and other secondary outcomes. We calculated the risk ratio (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) for each study and used a random-effects model to estimate the results. Study quality, bias, and heterogeneity were also analyzed. Results:A total of 11 studies (15,966 mastectomy procedures) were included. We found an overall 5.99% SSI rate in our population. Three studies comparing topical antibiotics with no topical antibiotics demonstrated statistical significance (RR = 0.26, 95% CI: 0.12-0.60, P = 0.001), whereas 8 studies comparing extended systemic antibiotics with standard of care found no statistical significance (RR = 0.80, 95% CI: 0.60-1.08, P = 0.13). Conclusions:In the setting of IBR following mastectomy, there is insufficient evidence for the use of extended prophylactic antibiotics to reduce SSI rates. Well-designed randomized controlled trials in patients undergoing IBR should be conducted to determine the appropriate regimen and/or duration of prophylactic antibiotics on SSI outcomes.
Project description:BackgroundPrior work has shown that the competitiveness of the market in which hospitals operate is associated with use of surgical procedures. This study examined the association between regional market competition and use of breast reconstruction for women with breast cancer and ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing mastectomy.MethodsWomen who underwent mastectomy from 2010 to 2011 recorded in the National Inpatient Sample were selected. The competitive market environment for each hospital in which patients were treated was estimated using the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index. Multivariable models were developed to examine the association between regional market competition and breast reconstruction, with adjustment for other clinical, demographic, and structural variables.ResultsImmediate breast reconstruction was performed for 9902 (45%) of 22,011 women. The rate of immediate breast reconstruction was 34.5% at hospitals in non-competitive markets, 49% at hospitals in moderately competitive markets, and 56.4% at hospitals in highly competitive markets (P < 0.0001). In a multivariable model, women in moderately competitive markets were 24% (risk ratio [RR] 1.24; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.10-1.41) more likely to undergo immediate breast reconstruction than women in noncompetitive markets, whereas those in competitive markets were 25% (RR 1.25; 95% CI 1.11-1.41) more likely to have reconstruction. Later year of treatment, higher census tract income level, and residence in an urban area were associated with an increased likelihood of reconstruction (P < 0.05 for all). In contrast, older age, non-white race, and non-commercial insurance were associated with a lower likelihood of reconstruction (P < 0.05 for all).ConclusionPatients who undergo mastectomy at hospitals in competitive markets are more likely to undergo immediate breast reconstruction.
Project description:ObjectiveTo evaluate complications after postmastectomy breast reconstruction, particularly in the setting of adjuvant radiotherapy.BackgroundMost studies of complications after breast reconstruction have been conducted at centers of excellence; relatively little is known about complication rates in irradiated patients treated in the broader community. This information is relevant for decision making in patients with breast cancer.MethodsUsing the claims-based MarketScan database, we described complications in 14,894 women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer from 1998 to 2007 and who underwent immediate autologous reconstruction (n = 2637), immediate implant-based reconstruction (n = 3007), or no reconstruction within the first 2 postoperative years (n = 9250). We used a generalized estimating equation to evaluate associations between complications and radiotherapy over time.ResultsWound complications were diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 2.3% of patients without reconstruction, 4.4% patients with implants, and 9.5% patients with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). Infection was diagnosed within the first 2 postoperative years in 12.7% of patients without reconstruction, 20.5% with implants, and 20.7% with autologous reconstruction (P < 0.001). A total of 5219 (35%) women received radiation. Radiation was not associated with infection in any surgical group within the first 6 months but was associated with an increased risk of infection in months 7 to 24 in all 3 groups (each P < 0.001). In months 7 to 24, radiation was associated with higher odds of implant removal in patients with implant reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.48; P < 0.001) and fat necrosis in those with autologous reconstruction (odds ratio = 1.55; P = 0.01).ConclusionsComplication risks after immediate breast reconstruction differ by approach. Radiation therapy seems to modestly increase certain risks, including infection and implant removal.
Project description:IntroductionThis study compares the perioperative results, aesthetic outcome and oncologic safety of single-port insufflation endoscopic nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy combined with immediate reconstruction using prosthesis implantation (SIE-NSM-IRPI) with those of conventional open-nipple and areola-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy combined with immediate reconstruction using prosthesis implantation (C-NSM-IRPI).MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, 64 early-stage breast cancer patients were divided into SIE-NSM-IRPI (n = 38) and C-NSM-IRPI (n = 26) groups. Perioperative results (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, drainage duration, and recent complications) were then compared between the two groups. Differences in satisfaction with the breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being (chest) and sexual well-being were analyzed according to the BREAST-Q scale, and survival outcomes were also compared.ResultsThe median follow-up time was 51.5 months. The incision length of SIE-NSM-IRPI was shorter than that of C-NSM-IRPI (P < 0.001). SIE-NSM-IRPI achieved the same detection rate and median number of sentinel lymph nodes as C-NSM-IRPI (3.00vs. 4.00, P = 0.780). The incidence of prosthesis removal due to infection or prosthesis exposure in the SIE-NSM-IRPI group was lower than that in the C-NSM-IRPI group (P = 0.015). Satisfaction with breasts (82.00vs.59.00, P < 0.001), psychosocial well-being (93.00vs.77.00, P = 0.001) and physical well-being (chest) (89.00vs.82.00, P < 0.001) scores were higher in the SIE-NSM-IRPI group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.829, 95% confidence interval = 0.182-3.779) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.919, 95% confidence interval = 0.169-21.842).ConclusionIn this selected cohort of patients with early breast cancer, SIE-NSM-IRPI was comparable to C-NSM-IRPI, considering oncologic safety and detection of sentinel lymph nodes. It had a lower incidence of prosthesis removal, shorter incision length, and was associated with better patient satisfaction with the breasts. More random clinical trials of this novel approach in a larger cohort of Chinese patients with an extended follow-up period are needed in the future.
Project description:BackgroundAn increasing number of patients with breast cancer are being offered immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of IBR on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer.MethodsWe searched the electronic databases of Medline (Pubmed), ISI Web of Knowledge, Embase, and Google Scholar databases for studies reporting the overall recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) of patients after mastectomy only and mastectomy with IBR. With these data, we conducted a meta-analysis of the clinical outcomes.ResultsFourteen studies, including 3641 cases and 9462 controls, matched our criteria. Relevant information was extracted from these 14 studies. There was no significant heterogeneity (P for Q-statistic > 0.10 and I2 < 25%). Patients who underwent IBR showed no increased risk of overall recurrence of breast cancer (RR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75, 1.04; P = 0.14). Furthermore, patients receiving IBR had similar DFS (RR = 1.04; 95%CI: 0.99, 1.08); P = 0.10) and OS (RR = 1.02; 95%CI: 0.99, 1.05; P = 0.24)) as those of control patients.ConclusionThis meta-analysis provides evidence that IBR does not have an adverse effect on prognosis. These data suggest that IBR is an appropriate and safe choice for patients with breast cancer.
Project description:IntroductionOncological safety, quality of life and cosmetic outcomes seems to be similar between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). We report our experience of IBR for consecutive mastectomies realized in a recent period of four years in order to determined immediate surgical results according to type of mastectomy and type of reconstruction, as mains objectives.MethodsAll mastectomies with IBR during years 2016-2019 were included. A retrospective analysis with prospective data collection was performed.ResultsWe analyzed 748 IBR: 353 nipple-sparing mastectomies (NSM), 391 skin-sparing mastectomies (SSM) and 4 standard mastectomies, 551 with definitive implant or expanders and 196 with latissimus dorsi-flap (LDF). More NSM were performed during the 2 last years and more LDF were performed for high BMI, high breast cup-size, neo-adjuvant chemotherapy and radiotherapy and local recurrence. We realized 111 robotic NSM and 125 robotic LDF. Longer duration of surgery was significantly associated with the robotic procedures.The overall complications crude rate was 31.4% with 9.9% of re-operations and 5.8% of implant loss. Grade 2-3 complications were significantly associated with smoking. Breast complications occurred in 32.9% of mastectomies with principally skin or nipple-areola-complex suffering or necrosis, hematomas and infections. A predictive score was determined to evaluate risk of complications before surgery.ConclusionMastectomy with IBR seems to be a safe technique with an acceptable complication rate which is increased by tobacco use, high breast cup-size and IBR-type.