Radioactive seed vs wire localization for nonpalpable breast lesions: A single institution review

The aim of this study was to compare wire localization (WL) and radioactive seed localization (RSL) for nonpalpable breast lesions with regard to margin status, re‐excision rate, procedure length, and complications related to localization. A retrospective review of the electronic health records at a single institution was performed. There was no difference in re‐excision rate, margin positivity, volume of tissue removed, and complication rate for RSL vs WL (P = 0.9934, P = 0.9934, P = 0.6645, and P = 0.4716 respectively). The only difference was a longer OR time, RSL = 104.408 minutes vs WL = 82.386 minutes. (P = 0.0163). RSL and WL are comparable techniques for localization of nonpalpable breast lesions.     

Intraoperative Radiotherapy of Early Breast Cancer Using Low‐Kilovoltage X‐Rays‐Reasons for Omission of Planned Intraoperative Irradiation

The purpose of this study is to investigate reasons for omission of a planned intraoperative radiotherapy (IORT) during breast‐conserving surgery (BCS). Between 2002 and 2009, in 297 women an IORT during BCS was planned. In 55 women this irradiation was finally not performed. We retrospectively analyzed pre‐, peri‐, and postoperative data of these 55 women. Main reasons for omission of an IORT were insufficient tumor–skin distance (n = 20, 35.1%), an oversized wound cavity (n = 14, 24.6%), and a combination of both (n = 8, 14%). Further reasons (n = 12, 21.1%) were temporal shortage, unplanned maintenance work of the Intrabeam^® device, unsuitable anatomicosurgical conditions, and ineligible histologic findings. Apart from suitable anatomic conditions, a precise preoperative ultrasonography as well as a strict interdisciplinary preoperative management is important for successful application of IORT.     

Indocyanine green fluorescence‐guided lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast cancer versus wire‐guided excision: A randomized clinical trial

The use of wire localization (WL) for excisions of nonpalpable breast cancer (NBC) has several disadvantages. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the use of indocyanine green‐guided nonpalpable breast cancer lesion localization (INBCL) and to compare it with WL. A total of 62 patients with a preoperative histological diagnosis of NBC lesions that could be visualized with ultrasound and mammography were randomized to INBCL or WL. Patients with preoperatively diagnosed primary ductal carcinoma in situ and multifocal disease were excluded from the study. Significance was considered at P < 0.05. Of all 62 excision, 32 (51.6%) were guided by INBCL and 30 (48.4%) by WL. Both techniques resulted in 100% retrieval of the lesions. The rate of clear margins was significantly higher in the INBCL group (87.5%; 28/32) compared to the WL (63.3%, 19/30) (P = 0.026), reducing the requirement of re‐excision. When results of the excised tissue are taken into account, the mean volume of the INBCL specimen was 56 cm³ less than that of the WL group, although this was not significantly different (P = 0.058). INBCL for NBCs was more accurate than WL, because it optimized the surgeon's ability to obtain clear margins. A smaller volume of the tissue may be excised by using INBCL technique. Therefore INBCL is an attractive alternative to WL.     

Feasibility of Intraoperative Breast MRI and the Role of Prone Versus Supine Positioning in Surgical Planning for Breast‐Conserving Surgery

We assessed the feasibility of supine intraoperative MRI (iMRI) during breast‐conserving surgery (BCS), enrolling 15 patients in our phase I trial between 2012 and 2014. Patients received diagnostic prone MRI, BCS, pre‐excisional supine iMRI, and postexcisional supine iMRI. Feasibility was assessed based on safety, sterility, duration, and image‐quality. Twelve patients completed the study; mean duration = 114 minutes; all images were adequate; no complications, safety, or sterility issues were encountered. Substantial tumor‐associated changes occurred (mean displacement = 67.7 mm, prone–supine metric, n = 7). We have demonstrated iMRI feasibility for BCS and have identified potential limitations of prone breast MRI that may impact surgical planning.     

Radio‐guided and clip‐guided preoperative localization for malignant microcalcifications offer similar performances in breast‐conserving surgery

Obtaining a tailored breast resection is challenging in microcalcifications detected on screening mammography, and an accurate localization is required. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of radio‐guided localization (ROLL) versus ultrasound localization of a titanium clip with collagen (TCC) in terms of clear margins, re‐intervention rates, excess of resected breast tissue, and operative times in pure malignant microcalcifications detected on screening mammography. Two hundred and twenty‐one consecutive patients with malignant microcalcifications detected on screening mammography from a tertiary breast unit were reviewed: 177 patients were localized by TCC and 44 patients by stereotactic ROLL. A propensity score‐matched analysis was performed, followed by a logistic regression model, to avoid selection bias. Adequacy of resection was expressed as the calculated resection ratio considering lesion size. No differences were found in clear margins with ROLL versus TCC (77.3% vs 81.8%, adjusted OR 2, P = 0.27). Re‐operation rates were similar, being 11.3% with ROLL and 7.4% with TCC (P = 0.627). Mean resection volume was 46.2 cm³ with ROLL versus 54.2 cm³ with TCC (P = 0.222). Adjusted mean calculated resection ratio was 1.8 with ROLL and 2.1 with TCC (P = 0.38). Surgery time was longer with TCC compared to ROLL (69.6 vs 52.7 minutes, P < 0.0001). ROLL and TCC are equally effective to excise malignant microcalcifications with clear margins, providing similar re‐intervention rates and resection volumes.     

Intraoperative inking is superior to suture marking for specimen orientation in breast cancer

Margin status is an important indicator of residual disease after breast‐conserving surgery (BCS). Intraoperatively, surgeons orient specimens to aid assessment of margins and guide re‐excision of positive margins. We performed a retrospective review of BCS cases from 2013 to 2017 to compare the two specimen orientation methods: suture marking and intraoperative inking. Patients with ductal carcinoma in situ, T1/T2 invasive cancer treated with BCS were included. Rates of positive margins and residual disease at re‐excision were evaluated. 189 patients underwent BCS; 83 had suture marking, 103 had intraoperative inking and 3 had un‐oriented specimens. The incidence of positive margins was 29% (24 patients) in the suture marked group and 20% (21 patients) in the intraoperative inked group (P = .18). Among the 45 patients with positive margins, 60% of tumors were stage T1, 76% were node negative, 36% were palpable with median tumor size of 1.5 cm. Residual disease was identified on re‐excision in 21% of the suture marked specimens and 57% of intraoperative inked specimens (P = .028). The incidence of residual cancer at re‐excision for positive margins was higher for intraoperatively inked versus suture marked specimens. This finding suggests that intraoperative inking is more effective at guiding re‐excision of positive margins.     

Oncological Advantages of Oncoplastic Breast‐Conserving Surgery in Treatment of Early Breast Cancer

The standard approach to breast‐conserving surgery is wide local excision of the tumor and radiotherapy. However, a significant number of patients require further surgery to obtain oncologically clear margins, and may obtain a poor cosmetic result following adjuvant radiotherapy. Oncoplastic techniques may result in improved cosmesis, but few studies have investigated the oncological advantage of this approach. The aim of this retrospective study was to compare tumor clearance and the need for further margin excision following standard wide local excision (group A, 121 patients), and oncoplastic breast‐conserving surgery (group B, 37 patients). These techniques included therapeutic mammoplasty, sub‐axillary fat pad rotation mammoplasty, thoraco‐epigastric flap, and central flap. Compared to standard surgery (group A), oncoplastic techniques (group B) can be employed for significantly larger tumors (17.6 mm versus 23.9 mm, p = 0.002). Oncoplastic breast‐conserving surgery results in higher mean specimen weights (58.1 g versus 231.1 g, p < 0.0001), higher specimen volumes (112.3 cm³ versus 484.5 cm³, p < 0.0001), and wider clear margins (6.1 mm versus 14.3 mm, p < 0.0001), resulting in lower rates of further surgery (28.9% versus 5.4%, p = 0.002). There was no statistical increase in complication rates following oncoplastic surgery. Oncoplastic breast‐conserving surgery is more successful than standard wide local excision in treating larger tumors and obtaining wider radial margins, thus reducing the need for further margin excision, which delays adjuvant therapy. There was no increase in postoperative complication rate using an oncoplastic approach.     

Acute toxicities after proton beam therapy following breast‐conserving surgery for breast cancer: Multi‐institutional prospective PCG registry analysis

We investigated adverse events (AEs) and clinical outcomes for proton beam therapy (PBT) after breast‐conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer. From 2012 to 2016, 82 patients received PBT in the prospective multi‐institutional Proton Collaborative Group registry. AEs were recorded prospectively at each institution. Median follow‐up was 8.1 months. Median dose was 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions. Most patients received a lumpectomy bed boost (90%) and regional nodal irradiation (RNI)(83%). Six patients (7.3%) experienced grade 3 AEs (5 with dermatitis, 5 with breast pain). Body mass index (BMI) was associated with grade 3 dermatitis (P = .015). Fifty‐eight patients (70.7%) experienced grade ≥2 dermatitis. PBT including RNI after BCS is well‐tolerated. Elevated BMI is associated with grade 3 dermatitis.     

Prediction of pathological margin status using preoperative contrast‐enhanced MRI in patients with early breast cancer who underwent skin‐sparing mastectomy

Skin‐sparing mastectomy (SSM) with immediate reconstruction is standard surgical treatment for early breast cancer with widespread ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The local recurrence rate after SSM is up to 7.0%. We investigated prediction of the pathological margin using contrast‐enhanced MRI, and evaluated the cut‐off point to obtain the safety margin. We performed SSM with immediate reconstruction in 216 early breast cancer patients with widespread DCIS and/or invasive cancer from January 2014 to December 2015. Forty cases were retrospectively reviewed after excluding those with >15 mm between skin and tumor, determined by preoperative contrast‐enhanced MRI, or involving reconstructive surgery for local recurrence, immeasurable lesion by preoperative contrast‐enhanced MRI, or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. We defined a positive pathological margin as <1 mm from the cancer nest. We reviewed the distance between skin and tumor by MRI and pathological examination. To identify the cut‐off for predicting a positive pathological margin, we performed sensitivity analysis using an ROC curve. The margin‐positive rate by pathological examination was 27.5% (n = 11/40), with a moderate correlation of MRI margin and pathological margin (r = 0.44). The best cut‐off point for margin positivity was 5 mm of MRI margin, with sensitivity and specificity of 54% and 86%, respectively (P = 0.009). This is the first prediction of pathological margin by preoperative contrast‐enhanced MRI in early breast cancer patients with SSM. Care is required for SSM if the MRI margin is less than 5 mm due to pathological margin positivity.     

The emerging role of pectoral nerve block (PECS block) in breast surgery: A case‐matched analysis

To evaluate the benefits of pectoral nerve block (PECS block) in breast cancer surgery, we compared outcomes of 100 patients receiving PECS vs 107 without PECS. Intraoperative use of fentanyl (P < .001) acetaminophen (P = .02), morphine (P < .01), and nonsteroidal anti‐inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) (P < .01) was lower in the PECS group. Occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was lower in the PECS group (P = .04). On postoperative day 1, the use of acetaminophen (P = .23), morphine (P = .83), and NSAIDS (P = .4) did not differ. Twenty‐one patients received surgery with PECS block plus sedation alone. PECS block can reduce intraoperative use of opioids and analgesic drugs, and is associated with reduced occurrence of PONV. Selected patients can receive breast‐conserving surgery with PECS plus sedation, avoiding general anesthesia.     

Excessive resections in breast-conserving surgery: a retrospective multicentre study

The main determinant of cosmetic outcomes following breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for breast cancer is the volume of resection. The importance of achieving optimal oncological control may lead to an unnecessarily large resection of breast tissue. The aim of this study is to evaluate excess resection volume in BCS for cancer by determining a calculated resection ratio (CRR). This retrospective study was conducted in four affiliated institutions and involved 726 consecutive patients with T1-T2 invasive breast cancer treated by BCS between January 2006 and 2009. The pathology reports were reviewed for tumor palpability, tumor size, surgical specimen size, and oncological margin status. The optimal resection volume (ORV) was defined as the spherical tumor volume with an added 1.0 cm margin of healthy breast tissue. The total resection volume (TRV) was defined as the ellipsoid volume of the surgical specimen. CRR was determined by dividing the TRV by the ORV. Of all tumors, 72% (525/726) were palpable, and 28% (201/726) were nonpalpable. The tumor stage was T1 in 492 patients (67.8%) and T2 in 234 patients (32.2%). The median CRR was 2.5 (0.01-42.93). Margin status was positive or focally positive in 153 patients (21.1%). Lower tumor stage was associated with a higher CRR (factor 0.61 [p < 0.0001] and a lower positive margin rate [p = 0.064]). Accordingly, the median CRR of the nonpalpable lesions was higher than that of the palpable lesions (3.1 and 2.2, respectively; p < 0.01), and the involved margin rate was lower (17.4% and 22.5%, respectively; p = 0.13). Of patients with a CRR >4.0, 10.7% still had tumor involved margins. This study clearly shows that BCS is associated with excessive resection of healthy breast tissue while clear margins are not assured. Surgical factors should be modified to improve surgical accuracy.     

Evaluation of cosmetic outcome following breast‐conserving therapy in trials: panel versus digitalized analysis and the role of PROMs

Cosmetic outcome is an important quality of life‐related end point following breast‐conserving therapy (BCT). To advise on a gold standard, we compare cosmetic outcome evaluated by panel and an objective evaluation (BCCT.core software). Second, patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs) are compared to cosmetic outcome evaluation by panel and BCCT.core. Sixty‐eight breast cancer patients were included following BCT between 2007 and 2012. Two independent 6‐member panels and two observers using the BCCT.core evaluated cosmetic outcome. First, reproducibility, repeatability, and relatedness of panel and BCCT.core were analyzed using the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Second, the association between panel/BCCT.core with PROMs (EORTC‐QLQ‐C30/BR23, EQ‐5D‐5L, and BREAST‐Q) was analyzed with a linear regression and the goodness of fit by the R². Both panel and BCCT.core evaluations showed “excellent” intraobserver agreement (ICC 0.93 [95% CI: 0.83; 0.97] and 0.93 [95% CI: 0.84; 0.97]) for respectively panel 1 and BCCT.core 1 and “excellent” interobserver agreement (ICC 0.94 [95% CI: 0.90; 0.96] and 0.85 [95% CI: 0.77; 0.91]) respectively for panel and BCCT.core. Association between panel and BCCT.core varied, ICC 0.59‐0.69. Only the PROM BREAST‐Q showed a significant association with both panel evaluations and BCCT.core observers (panel 1 and BCCT.core 1; R² of .157 [P = .002] and .178 [P = .001]). Both panel and BCCT.core showed comparable “excellent” intraobserver and interobserver agreement. For future trials evaluating cosmetic outcome following BCT, one of those can be chosen. Solely, the PROM BREAST‐Q showed a significant association with panel and/or BCCT.core evaluation. To enable standardized cosmetic outcome evaluation and corresponding patient satisfaction in future trials, at least the BREAST‐Q should be combined with a panel or BCCT.core evaluation.     

Outcomes of metastatic breast cancer patients in relationship to disease‐free interval following primary treatment of localized disease; a pooled analysis of two clinical trials

The aim of the current study is to assess the impact of disease‐free interval (DFI) following treatment of primary localized breast cancer on the outcomes of patients with subsequent metastatic breast cancer treated with first‐line docetaxel chemotherapy. This study is a combined analysis of patient‐level raw data of 604 metastatic breast cancer patients referred for docetaxel first‐line chemotherapy in two clinical trials. Overall survival and time to progression were evaluated according to DFI through Kaplan‐Meier analysis. Multivariate analysis of factors affecting overall survival and time to progression was then conducted through Cox regression analysis. For the overall cohort, shorter DFI is associated with worse overall survival (P < 0.0001). When classified by the hormone receptor status, the shorter interval was associated with worse overall survival in both hormone receptor positive and negative patients (P = 0.009; P = 0.018; respectively). Likewise, shorter DFI is associated with shorter time to progression (P < 0.0001) in the overall cohort. When classified by the hormone receptor status, the shorter interval was associated with shorter time to progression for hormone receptor negative but not positive patients (P = 0.001; P = 0.070; respectively). In multivariate Cox regression analysis, the following factors were associated with worse overall survival: shorter DFI (P < 0.0001), poorer ECOG performance score (P = 0.008) and lower body mass index (P = 0.018). Likewise, in multivariate Cox regression analysis, the following factors were associated with shorter time to progression: shorter DFI (P < 0.0001) and hormone receptor negative status (P = 0.025). Shorter DFI was associated with worse overall survival and shorter time to progression among patients receiving first‐line docetaxel chemotherapy.     

Outcomes of single‐port gasless laparoscopic breast‐conserving surgery for breast cancer: An observational study

To compare the clinical efficacy and aesthetic perspectives between single‐port gasless laparoscopic breast‐conserving surgery (SGL‐BCS) and traditional breast‐conserving surgery (T‐BCS) in early‐stage breast cancer. A total of 70 patients who were diagnosed with stage I or stage II breast cancer participated in this study, which 35 patients underwent SGL‐BCS, while others underwent T‐BCS. There were no death or severe intraoperative complications, and none of the patients exhibited regional recurrence, distant metastases, or any critical complications after 2 years follow‐up. SGL‐BCS is feasible and safe surgery, and has advantages in terms of a single, shorter, hidden incision, high‐satisficed aesthetic outcome and less intraoperative blood loss.     

Use of polysaccharide hemostatic agent (HaemoCer™) in breast cancer surgery to reduce postoperative complications: A randomised controlled trial

Postoperative wound-site bleeding, tissue inflammation and seroma formation are well-known complications in the field of breast surgery. Hemostatic agents consisting of polysaccharides may be used intra-operatively to minimise postoperative complications. We conducted a prospective randomised-controlled, single-centre study including 136 patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery for invasive or intraductal breast cancer. Of these, 68 patients were randomised to receive an absorbable polysaccharide hemostatic agent into the wound site during surgery, while 68 patients were randomised to the control group and did not receive any hemostatic agent. Primary outcome was the total volume of postoperative drained fluid from the surgical site. Secondary outcomes were the number of days until drain removal and rate of immediate postoperative surgical site infection Patients in the intervention group had significantly higher drainage output volumes compared with the control group 85 mL (IQR 46.25–110) versus 50 mL (IQR 30–75), respectively; (P = .003). Univariable linear regression analyses showed a significant association between the surgical specimen and the primary outcome (P < .001). After multivariable analysis, the use of absorbable polysaccharide hemostatic product was no longer significantly associated with a higher drainage output and only the size of the surgical specimen remained a significant predictor. The number of days until drainage removal and the postoperative seroma formation were higher in the intervention group (P = .004) and (P = .003), respectively. In our study, intraoperative application of polysaccharide hemostatic agent during breast-conserving surgery did not decrease postoperative fluid production. Only the size of the surgical specimen was significantly associated with postoperative drainage volume.     

Breast reconstruction patterns and outcomes in academic and community practices within a single institution

Breast reconstruction is a common procedure that is performed in both community and academic settings. At Yale‐New Haven Hospital (YNHH), both academic (AP) and community‐based (CP) plastic surgeons perform breast reconstructions. We aim to compare practice patterns in breast reconstruction between two practice environments within a single institution. A retrospective chart review of all breast reconstructions at YNHH between 2013 and 2018 was performed. Data collected included demographics, preoperative history, and postoperative outcomes. Results were further subdivided by practice setting. A total of 1045 patients (1683 breasts) underwent breast reconstruction during the study period. About 52.8% were performed by AP while 47.2% were performed by CP. CP had higher rates of autologous reconstruction (P < .001) and nipple‐sparing mastectomy (P < .0001). Age and BMI were similar between the cohorts. However, patients cared for by AP had 2.6% increased prevalence of diabetes (P = .064), 5.5% greater prevalence of psychiatric diagnoses (P = .004), and 7.1% higher open abdominal surgery rates (P < .001). Outcomes were similar between the groups except for higher infection rates (P = .027) and explant rates (P = .003) in the CP cohort. When evaluating insurance status, the AP cohort had 30.5% fewer patients with commercial insurance, 16.7% more patients with Medicaid and 6.1% more patients with Medicare (P < .001). Within our institution, academic and community‐based plastic surgeons perform breast reconstruction with overall similar complication rates. Patients treated by AP have a higher rate of preoperative medical and psychiatric comorbidities. Patients treated by CP have higher rates of infection and implant explant. AP plastic surgeons care for a significantly higher rate of Medicare and Medicaid patients with proportionally fewer patients with commercial insurance.     

The Relative Benefits of Tamoxifen in Older Women with T1 Early‐Stage Breast Cancer Treated with Breast‐Conserving Surgery and Radiation Therapy

Small, hormone receptor‐positive breast carcinomas in older women are associated with low local recurrence rates. The relative benefits of adjuvant hormonal therapy remain unclear in elderly women with small, node‐negative breast cancer after breast‐conserving surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy. From our institutional data base, 224 patients ≥65 years of age with T1N0M0 breast cancer treated with BCS+RT were identified. Of these, 102 patients (45.5%) received tamoxifen (TAM) and 122 patients (54.5%) did not (no‐TAM). The median follow‐up time was 62.6 months. The 10‐year local relapse‐free survival (LRFS) was 98% in both the TAM and no‐TAM cohorts (p = 0.58); the 10‐year DMFS was 83% TAM vs. 89% no‐TAM (p = 0.91). There was no difference in 10‐year contralateral breast relapse or overall survival (OS) between the two cohorts. In univariate and multivariate analysis, use of TAM was not associated with LRFS, distant metastases‐free survival (DMFS), OS, or a reduction in contralateral breast cancers when compared with the no‐TAM cohort. In this large cohort of T1N0 elderly breast cancer patients treated with CS+RT, the use of TAM did not appear to decrease ipsilateral breast relapse, contralateral breast relapse, distant metastasis, or OS.     

The Value of Preoperative Lesion Dedicated Ultrasound of Breast Cancer before Conserving Surgery for Optimizing Margins

To investigate the effect of US performed immediately before breast conserving surgery (BCS) by radiologist accompanied by the surgeon. All patients scheduled for BCS in the last year (group 1, n = 46) were evaluated with US immediately before surgery. About 108 patients (group 2) who were treated with BCS before the study were included as the control group. Tumor size and localization, the distances between tumor–skin and tumor–pectoralis muscle fascia were noted. Re‐excision rate due to positive margins was significantly lower in group 1. Statistically significant difference was detected in re‐excision rates for nonpalpable tumors. Preoperative US is an effective and practical method.     

Loco‐regional Control After Neo‐adjuvant Chemotherapy and Conservative Treatment for Locally Advanced Breast Cancer Patients

Breast‐conserving treatment (BCT) has been validated for breast cancer patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy. Our objective was to evaluate the difference in loco‐regional recurrence (LRR) rates between BCT and mastectomy in patients receiving radiation therapy after neo‐adjuvant chemotherapy (NCT). A retrospective data base was used to identify all patients with breast cancer undergoing NCT from 2002 to 2007. Patients with initial metastatic disease were excluded from this analysis. LRR was compared between those undergoing BCT and mastectomy. Individual variables associated with LRR were evaluated. Two hundred eighty‐four patients were included, 111 (39%) underwent BCT and 173 (61%) mastectomy. Almost all patients (99%) in both groups received postoperative radiation. Pathologic complete response was seen in 37 patients, of which 28 underwent BCT (p < 0.001). Patients receiving mastectomy had more invasive lobular carcinoma (p = 0.007) and a higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage (p < 0.001) at diagnosis than those with BCT. At a median follow‐up of 6.3 years, the loco‐regional control rate was 91% (95% CI: 86–94%). The 10‐year LRR rate was similar in the BCT group (9.2% [95% CI: 4.9–16.7%]) and in the mastectomy group (10.7% [95% CI: 5.9–15.2%]; p = 0.8). Ten‐year overall survival (OS) rates (63% [95% CI: 46–79%] in the BCT group; 60% [95% CI: 47–73%] in the mastectomy group, p = 0.8) were not statistically different between the two patient populations. Multivariate analysis showed that AJCC stage ≥ III (HR: 2.6; 95% CI: 1.2–5.8; p = 0.02), negative PR (HR: 6; 95% CI: 1.2–30.6, p = 0.03), and number of positive lymph nodes ≥3 (HR: 2.5; 95% CI: 1.1–5.9; p = 0.03) were independent predictors of LRR. Ten‐year OS was similar in the BCT and in the mastectomy group (p = 0.1). The rate of LRR was low and did not significantly differ between the BCT and the mastectomy group after NCT. Randomized trials assessing whether mastectomy can be safely omitted in selected breast cancer patients (nonstage III tumors or those which do not require adjuvant hormone suppression) which respond to NCT are required.     

Operative risk stratification in the obese female undergoing implant‐based breast reconstruction

The prevalence of obesity is growing, and breast reconstruction in the obese patient is becoming the norm rather than the exception. Our aim was to evaluate implant reconstruction outcomes in the obese female in the presence of coincident surgical risk factors and identify potential risk‐reducing interventions. A review of consecutive obese women (BMI ≥ 30) who underwent mastectomy and implant breast reconstruction was performed. Patient demographics, comorbidities, oncologic treatments, and reconstructive procedures and their complications were recorded. A total of 151 women (242 breast reconstructions) were included with mean follow‐up of 28 months. Average BMI was 36. Eighty percent of cases were immediate and 20% delayed. ADMs were utilized in 58% of cases. About 25% of patients had diabetes with one‐third achieving perioperative glycemic control. About 18% of women were active smokers, and 33% had radiotherapy. Major and minor complications occurred in 42% and 11% of patients, respectively. About 24% of reconstructed breasts required implant removal. Obese patients with prior radiation were three times as likely to develop infection (P = 0.008) and 2.5× as likely to undergo explantation (P = 0.002). Skin flap necrosis was three times as likely in obese smokers (P = 0.01). Increased rates of wound breakdown were identified in obese patients with increasing age (P = 0.005), smoking (P = 0.0035), and radiation (P = 0.023). In the obese radiated and smoking patient subgroups, surgical modifications (use of autologous tissue, delayed breast reconstruction timing, and no ADM) were associated with reduction in the relative risk for implant complications. While obesity alone increases implant breast reconstruction complication rates, the presence of additional risk factors compounds these rates. The use of surgical modifications may reduce the occurrence of perioperative complications in the obese female with coincident surgical risk factors undergoing implant breast reconstruction.