Article

Using complications associated with postmastectomy radiation and immediate breast reconstruction to improve surgical decision making.

Oregon Health & Science University, Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, 3181 SW Sam Jackson Park Road, Portland, OR 97239, USA.
Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill.: 1960) (Impact Factor: 4.3). 09/2010; 145(9):873-8. DOI: 10.1001/archsurg.2010.170
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To identify factors independently associated with surgical complications in oncologic and reconstructive surgery and to examine sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy data, along with variables that are typically known prior to definitive resection, for their ability to impact the prediction of need for postmastectomy irradiation (PMRT).
Retrospective review.
University hospital.
Mastectomy patients with stage I to III breast cancer treated in 2000 to 2008.
Complication rates of oncologic and reconstructive surgery requiring reoperation and clinicopathologic variables that independently predict complications and/or PMRT administration by multivariate analysis.
Among 100 of 302 mastectomy patients who underwent PMRT, complications occurred in 44% who underwent immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and 7% who did not (P < .001). Postmastectomy irradiation independently predicted the occurrence of a complication (odds ratio, 3.3; P < .001). Implants were removed in 31% of patients who underwent PMRT and 6% of patients who did not (P = .005). Three percent of patients with T2 or smaller tumors and zero positive SLN required PMRT. Among those with T2 tumors, 49% with a positive axilla lymph node underwent PMRT. Independent predictors of PMRT need were T2 vs T1 tumors, positive axillary lymph node status, and the number of positive SLNs, with odds ratios of 5.8 (P < .001), 14.5 (P < .001), and 2.1 (P = .001), respectively.
Postmastectomy irradiation was associated with a high rate of surgical complications and implant loss among patients who underwent IBR. Determining the number of positive SLNs prior to definitive resection and reconstructive operations may reduce complications and implant loss by guiding surgical decision making. Patients with a negative SLN are unlikely to require PMRT. Those with positive SLN(s) are high-risk IBR candidates with a quantifiable PMRT risk.

0 Followers
 · 
78 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Physicians are still concerned about the oncological safety regarding immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) in breast cancer patients. This study aimed to evaluate possible differences between local, regional, and distant recurrences between women having implant-based reconstruction versus women operated with mastectomy alone. Secondary aims were to evaluate time to oncological treatment as well as disease-free and breast-cancer-specific survival. In a retrospective cohort designed study, 300 reconstructed patients with invasive breast cancer were matched with 300 patients from the population-based Regional Breast Cancer Register of the Stockholm-Gotland health-care region operated with mastectomy alone. They were matched for age, tumor size, nodal stage, and year of operation. Also included were patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy. The median follow-up for both the groups was 11.5 years (range 2-20). There were no significant differences in the local recurrence rate, 8.2% in the IBR group and 9.0% in the control group or in the regional recurrence rate, 8.2% versus 9.7%. Distant metastases occurred more frequently in the control group (27.1%) when compared to the IBR group (20.3%). There were no significant differences in time to treatment or in complications rate. Breast cancer mortality was 17% for the IBR group and 23% in the control group during follow-up. This long-term follow-up survey with a well-matched control group demonstrates that IBR with implants is safe to offer patients with invasive breast cancer without any negative effect on the oncological safety.
    Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 03/2011; 127(2):439-46. DOI:10.1007/s10549-011-1437-y · 4.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    Archives of surgery (Chicago, Ill.: 1960) 06/2011; 146(6):762-4. DOI:10.1001/archsurg.2011.112 · 4.30 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:: We conducted a retrospective survey of American Society of Plastic Surgeons to ascertain the current trends in breast reconstruction (BR). METHODS:: Surveys were sent to 2250 active American Society of Plastic Surgeons members by e-mail with a cover letter including the link using Survey Monkey for the year 2010. In all, 489 surveys (a response rate of 21.7%) were returned. Three hundred fifty-eight surveys from respondents performing BR in their practices were included in the study. The survey included questions on surgeon demographics, practice characteristics, BR after mastectomy, number of BR per year, type and timing of BR, use of acellular dermal matrix, reconstructive choices in the setting of previous irradiation and in patients requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy, timing of contralateral breast surgery, fat grafting, techniques used for nipple-areola reconstruction, the complications, and physician satisfaction and physician reported patient satisfaction. Returned responses were tabulated and assessed. RESULTS:: After prophylactic mastectomy, 16% of BRs were performed. In all, 81.2% of plastic surgeons predominantly performed immediate BR. In patients requiring postmastectomy radiation therapy, 81% did not perform immediate BR. Regardless of practice setting and laterality of reconstruction, 82.7% of respondents predominantly performed implant-based BR. Half of the plastic surgeons performing prosthetic BR used acellular dermal matrix. Only 14% of plastic surgeons predominantly performed autologous BR. Surgeons in solo, plastic surgery group practices, and multispecialty group practices preferred implant-based BR for both unilateral and bilateral cases more frequently than those in academic practices (P < 0.05). Overall, plastic surgeons in academic settings preferred autologous BR more frequently than those in other practice locations (P < 0.05). Of total respondents, 64.8% did not perform microsurgical BR at all; 28% reported performing deep inferior epigastric perforator flap BR. Pedicled transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous flap was the most often used option for unilateral autologous reconstruction, whereas deep inferior epigastric perforator flap was the most commonly used technique for bilateral BR. The overall complication rate reported by respondents was 11%. CONCLUSION:: The survey provides an insight to the current trends in BR practice with respect to surgeon and practice setting characteristics. Although not necessarily the correct best practices, the survey does demonstrate a likely portrayal of what is being practiced in the United States in the area of BR.
    Annals of plastic surgery 08/2011; 70(1). DOI:10.1097/SAP.0b013e31822ed5ce · 1.46 Impact Factor