临床与基础研究保留乳头乳晕乳房切除术治疗乳腺癌的安全性研究

目的 探讨保留乳头乳晕的乳房切除术治疗乳腺癌的安全性及手术技巧。方法 收集2012年5月至2017年7月武汉科技大学附属孝感医院69例乳腺癌保留乳头乳晕的乳房切除术患者的资料,分析其手术技巧。结果 69例患者术中冰冻切片诊断乳头下方腺体癌累及6例,另63例均顺利完成保留乳头乳晕的乳房切除术。18例术后发生乳头部分表皮坏死,3～6周均结痂愈合,无乳头全层坏死。术后随访8～62个月,中位随访26个月,均未出现局部复发或全身转移。结论 保留乳头乳晕的乳房切除术适用于Ⅰ、Ⅱ期患者。术前精准的病例选择、术中切缘病理评估、术中精细手术技巧在保证肿瘤切除同时,获得最佳的美容效果。     

保留乳头乳晕复合体的乳腺癌切除术中放疗的地位探讨

在乳腺癌切除术的术式选择中,保留乳头乳晕复合体(nipple-areola complex,NAC)的乳房切除术(nipple-areola complex-sparing mastectomy,NSM)保留了皮肤和NAC,从而有利于后期的重建。目前在NSM治疗中,有几个关键问题尚未达成统一共识,包括NSM术中或术后是否加用或联合局部放疗,最终指向保留NAC后的肿瘤复发的安全性即术后局部复发率问题。有研究报道,不管是术后放疗还是术中放疗,联合NSM都能降低局部复发率,然而,对比联合放疗的研究和未放疗的研究,显示NSM后局部复发率相似,因此从整个NSM的治疗原则出发,患者的选择和手术质控是整个治疗的关键,对于不同复发风险的患者需要采取不同的联合放疗的方案。     

保留乳头乳晕的乳腺癌改良根治术治疗乳腺癌的安全性

保留乳头乳晕的乳腺癌改良根治术（NSM）作为乳腺外科的一种术式,因其保留了患者的乳头乳晕复合体（NAC）,对患者术后的美容效果或者术后重建外观美容有极为重要的意义。然而,其临床应用仍存在一些值得探讨的争议点。近年来国内外出现了一些与NSM安全性相关的热点问题,如NSM术前筛选标准、NAC受侵情况、NSM术后并发症及处理方法等。     

乳腺癌乳头乳晕复合体受侵犯的相关临床病理因素

保留乳头乳晕复合体(nipple areola complex,NAC)的乳房切除术(nipple-areola complexsparing mastectomy,NSM)是传统的乳腺切除手术的一种改进术式,能完整切除肿瘤并最大限度保持乳房外形美观。目前有关NSM仍存在许多尚待解决的问题,其中一个重要问题就是如何在术前选择合适的患者。许多肿瘤的临床病理特征,如肿瘤到乳头的距离(tumor-to-nipple distance,TND)和肿瘤位置、肿瘤大小、多中心性肿瘤、淋巴结转移和脉管侵犯、组织学分级、HER-2表达情况等与NAC隐匿性的肿瘤累及率密切相关,但如何在NSM术前对这些指标进行精确评估仍需进一步探索。临床评估NAC有无异常,NAC后方乳腺组织的病理评估,并综合分析与NAC累及相关的临床病理因素是目前用于判断乳腺癌患者是否可行NSM的主要方法。更多的大规模临床研究仍需进行,以利于制定统一的NSM患者选择标准。     

Current aspects of therapeutic reduction mammaplasty for immediate early breast cancer management: An update

Breast-conservation surgery (BCS) is established as a safe surgical treatment for most patients with early breast cancer. Recently, advances in oncoplastic techniques are capable of preserving the breast form and quality of life. Although most BCS defects can be managed with primary closure, the aesthetic outcome may be unpredictable. Among technical options, therapeutic reduction mammaplasty (TRM) remains a useful procedure since the BCS defect can be repaired and the preoperative appearance can be improved, resulting in more proportional breasts. As a consequence of rich breast tissue vascularization, the greater part of reduction techniques have based their planning on preserving the pedicle of the nipple-areola complex after tumor removal. Reliable circulation and improvement of a conical shape to the breast are commonly described in TRM reconstructions. With an immediate approach, the surgical process is smooth since both procedures can be carried out in one operative setting. Additionally, it permits wider excision of the tumor, with a superior mean volume of the specimen and potentially reduces the incidence of margin involvement. Regardless of the fact that there is no consensus concerning the best TRM technique, the criteria is determined by the surgeon’s experience, the extent/location of glandular tissue resection and the size of the defect in relation to the size of the remaining breast. The main advantages of the technique utilized should include reproducibility, low interference with the oncological treatment and long-term results. The success of the procedure depends on patient selection, coordinated planning and careful intra-operative management.     

Survival in breast cancer after nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants: A prospective trial with 13 years median follow-up in 216 patients

Aim

Validation of the oncological safety of nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants (NSM) and of the outcome in patients with locoregional recurrences (LRRs) after this procedure.

Methods

Two-hundred and sixteen patients, mean age of 52.8 (29–81) years with primary unilateral breast cancer, not suitable for partial mastectomy because of large (>3 cm) or multifocal carcinoma, underwent NSM, a single procedure lasting about 1 h 30 min, between December 1988 and September 1994. Lymph node metastases were found in 40.3% of the patients, and 47 patients received radiotherapy (RT) postoperatively. All patients were monitored for at least 11.6 years or as long as they lived. Median follow-up was 13 years. The end-points were locoregional recurrence (LRR) or distant metastases (DM) as first events, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results

Specificity at frozen section from sub-areolar tissues was 98.5%. LRR occurred in 52 patients and DM in 44 patients. DFS was 51.3% and OS was 76.4%. The frequency of LRR was 8.5% among irradiated and 28.4% among non-irradiated patients (p = 0.025). These results compare well with results after conventional mastectomy in other trials. All patients were monitored for at least 6 years after the occurrence of LRR, finding 5 years freedom from further LRR or DM of 60% and OS of 82%.

Conclusions

NSM is an oncologically safe procedure and could be offered to most patients with breast cancer unsuitable for sector resection only. RT effectively lowers the frequency of LRR. The occurrence of LRR after this operation does not significantly affect OS.     

Multidisciplinary international survey of post-operative radiation therapy practices after nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy

Purpose/Objective(s)

Skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have entered routine surgical practice for breast cancer, though their oncologic safety has not been established in randomized controlled trials. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare radiation oncologists' and breast surgeons' opinions concerning the indications of post-operative radiation therapy (PORT) after SSM and NSM.

Esthetic evaluation of immediate breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that immediate autologous tissue breast reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) or skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) is esthetically superior to autologous tissue reconstruction after conventional mastectomy (CM). We evaluated reconstructed breasts to determine whether these methods contribute to breast appearance other than skin texture. METHODS: Between April 1992 and September 2001, forty-two patients underwent immediate breast reconstruction using autologous tissue. Mastectomy options were NSM, SSM and CM. Postoperative photographs were evaluated using a subscale (volume, contour, placement, and inframammary fold) on a 0-2 point scale. Sternal notch to nipple distances of the affected and normal sides were measured with photographs to estimate nipple-areola complex (NAC) position. No corrective procedure was performed in a later phase before evaluation. RESULTS: NSM was performed in 22, SSM in 6 and CM in 14 cases. On esthetic evaluation, the NSM and SSM groups received 4.96 and the CM group received 4.63. There were no significant differences. In the NSM and SSM group, the NAC position rose in cases with partial necrosis or fat lysis compared with the no complication group (p = 0,004). CONCLUSIONS: Autologous tissue breast reconstruction after NSM or SSM is esthetically equal to autologous tissue reconstruction after CM with regard to parameters other than skin texture. Preserved or simultaneously reconstructed NAC sometimes emphasizes nipple-areola asymmetry when breast deformity has occurred.     

Nipple-sparing mastectomy: where are we now?

Surgical treatment of breast cancer has evolved from radical mastectomy with routine removal of the nipple–areolar complex (NAC) to breast conservative therapy with preservation of the breast and NAC. When breast conservation is not appropriate or the patient desires mastectomy for risk reduction, conventional therapy still consists of mastectomy with removal of the NAC, followed by reconstruction. Rising interest in improved cosmesis has led to the introduction of the skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) as potential alternatives to mastectomy. There has been much controversy regarding the oncologic safety of these procedures, and the NSM has also introduced a set of complications, such as nipple and areolar necrosis, that are not a concern with total mastectomy. From our review of the literature, we feel that NSM may be a viable option in the appropriate setting, and that its risks and complications are acceptable when compared to the traditional surgical treatment of breast cancer.     

保留乳头乳晕的全乳切除术的研究进展

乳腺癌已成为全球癌症发病率最高的恶性肿瘤。乳腺癌治疗主要采用以手术为主的综合治疗方案，保留乳头乳晕的全乳切除术（nipple-sparing mastectomy，NSM）作为乳腺外科的一种术式，保留了全部乳房皮肤和乳头乳晕复合体（nipple-areolar complex，NAC），术后乳房再造可获得良好的美学效果，具有显著优势。NSM在保证肿瘤学安全性的同时，提升了患者的生存质量，得到临床上越来越多的重视。本文将就NSM的适应证、禁忌证、肿瘤学安全性、美学效果、并发症及复发后的处理进行综述。      

Long-Term Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy With Immediate Reconstruction

BackgroundWe assessed the long-term oncologic safety of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) compared to skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) for primary breast cancer patients with immediate reconstruction.Patients and MethodsData of stage 0-III primary breast cancer patients undergoing NSM (n = 190) or SSM (n = 729) from June 2006 to December 2012 were retrospectively collected. Nipple–tumor distance (NTD) was measured on pretreatment mammography, magnetic resonance imaging, or ultrasonography findings. NSM patients with NTD < 1 cm were excluded. Locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates were compared between groups. Disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) according to surgical procedure were assessed.ResultsThe median (range) follow-up period for NSM and SSM was 71 (10-131) months and 79 (9-140) months, respectively. LRR developed in 11 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma (5.8%) for NSM and 44 (42 in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma and 2 in patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ) (6.0%) for SSM. Hormone receptor and HER2 status were not associated with LRR in either group. DFS and OS rates did not differ between groups (DFS: 89.3% for NSM, 89.3% for SSM, P = .87; OS: 98.4% for NSM, 94.5% for SSM, P = .43).ConclusionNSM with immediate reconstruction was as safe as SSM for primary breast cancer with respect to prognosis and local control, regardless of the presence of invasive carcinoma or breast cancer subtype.     

Immediate postmastectomy reconstruction

The role of reconstruction in the management of patients with problems related to breast cancer is of increasing importance. Immediate reconstruction is particularly applicable in those situations where prophylactic mastectomy is performed. High-risk groups who warrant such prophylactic mastectomy and reconstruction include those with florid cyst disease, a strong family history of breast cancer, the finding of lobular carcinoma in situ, multiple previous biopsies, and those who have severe and progressive mastodynia. In those with smaller amounts of breast tissue, reconstruction is based on a double layer of tissue over a graft, one layer consisting of pectoral muscle and the other of breast skin. In those with more abundant breast tissue, the two layers placed over the graft are both derived from skin flaps, the inner layer a free, denuded dermal graft from the inferior flap and the second layer, the superior breast skin flap itself.     

Oncologic outcomes and technical considerations of nipple-sparing mastectomies in breast cancer: experience of 425 cases from a single institution

Background

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is an advantageous treatment option, providing a complete cure and good cosmetic results. We tested whether NSM is a surgically and oncologically safe technique.

Methods

We evaluated the oncological outcome of 425 breasts in 413 patients who underwent NSM between January 2000 and March 2013. We retrospectively reviewed patient data and analyzed all patient characteristics as potential risk factors of recurrence at the nipple–areola complex (NAC). To confirm the oncological safety of NSM, we compared outcomes of NSM and conventional total mastectomy.

Results

The median follow-up time after surgery was 46.8 months (range 6–158 months). Nipple necrosis was observed in 6 cases (1.4 %). The cumulative local recurrence rate after NSM was 5.8 % (25/425 cases), similar to that of conventional total mastectomy in the same period (5.6 %, 49/878 cases). Furthermore, the cumulative local recurrence rate at the NAC was 2.3 % (10 cases). HER2-enriched tumors and young age (<40 years) were significant risk factors for recurrence at the NAC. In patients with recurrence, the site of recurrence was easily excised, and good cosmetic results were achieved in breast reconstruction cases.

Conclusion

NSM is safe with a low complication rate. No significant difference was observed in cumulative local recurrence rate, cumulative distant disease recurrence rate, and overall survival between patients who underwent NSM or conventional total mastectomy, confirming that NSM was surgically and oncologically safe.

     

Update on the indications for nipple-sparing mastectomy

There is renewed interest in the use of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), which combines skin-sparing mastectomy with preservation of the nipple-areola complex. NSM may be an oncologically safe treatment in a subgroup of patients who are candidates for breast-conserving surgery but still prefer to undergo mastectomy. A combination of newer techniques and good coordination between plastic and oncologic surgeons can achieve excellent cosmetic results and a low incidence of postoperative complications. However, major concerns about NSM include the persistent risk for breast cancer development when it is used for prophylaxis as well as the potential failure of local control when it is used for treatment. The reported experience with these newer techniques lacks the power to generate a consensus for its indications because of limited reported series with small populations. Although the current role of NSM seems to be more defined as a prophylactic procedure in high-risk patients, prospective studies and reports are needed to better define its indications.     

Immediate reconstruction with implants in women with invasive breast cancer does not affect oncological safety in a matched cohort study

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.     

保乳治疗复发后的乳房再造研究现状

在全球范围内,保乳术及整形保乳术在乳腺癌外科治疗中逐渐被广泛应用。对于保乳术后同侧乳房局部复发患者,相当一部分因会选择补救性全乳切除,面临着乳房缺失问题。这部分患者因有胸壁放疗史,并多进行过系统治疗,因此行乳房再造时具有一定的特殊性,需引起手术医师的重视。为给予手术医师手术方案的制定提供线索与帮助,本文将从肿瘤学安全性、术后近远期并发症、术后美学效果方面对解救性乳房切除术联合即刻乳房再造进行综述。      

Impact of Body Composition on Postoperative Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Robotic Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction

Nipple-areolar complex (NAC)-related complications are common during nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), with obesity as a risk factor. Although the incidence of NAC-related complications after robotic NSM (RNSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is lower than that after conventional NSM, it remains one of the most unwanted complications. We aimed to evaluate body composition-based risk factors for NAC-related complications after RNSM with IBR. Data of 92 patients with breast cancer who underwent RNSM with IBR using direct-to-implant or tissue expander from November 2017 to September 2020 were analyzed retrospectively. Risk factors for NAC-related complications were identified with a focus on body composition using preoperative transverse computed tomography at the third lumbar vertebra level. Postoperative complications were assessed for 6 months. The most common complication was NAC ischemia, occurring in 15 patients (16%). Multivariate analysis revealed a low skeletal muscle index/total adipose tissue index (SMI/TATI) ratio as an independent NAC ischemia risk factor. An increase in the SMI/TATI ratio by one decreased the incidence of NAC ischemia by 0.940-fold (p = 0.030). A low SMI/TATI ratio is a risk factor for postoperative NAC ischemia in patients undergoing RNSM with IBR for breast cancer. Preoperative body composition-focused evaluation is more valuable than simple body mass index assessment.     

Significance of Non-Mass Enhancement in the Subareolar Region on Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

PurposeThe eligibility for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) regarding subareolar non-mass enhancement (NME) on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the eligibility for NSM according to the NME-to-nipple distance on preoperative breast MRI.MethodsWe identified patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy with NME suspected of malignancy in the subareolar region on preoperative breast MRI. The incidence of nipple invasion was pathologically evaluated according to the NME-to-nipple distance on breast MRI, and the clinicopathologic factors related to pathologic nipple invasion were analyzed.ResultsOf 137 patients, 55 (40.1%) had NME extension to the nipple, 53 (38.7%) had radiologic distance less than 2 cm, and 29 (21.2%) had radiologic distance of 2 cm or more. The rate of pathologic nipple invasion was 52.7% (29 of 55) in patients with NME extension to nipple, 7.5% (4 of 53) in patients with NME-to-nipple distance less than 2 cm, and 3.4% (1 of 29) in patients with NME-to-nipple distance of 2 cm or more (P < .001). NME extension to the nipple was an independent risk factor for pathologic nipple invasion (odds ratio 21.702; 95% confidence interval, 2.613–180.225; P = .004). The survival outcome was not different between NSM and conventional total mastectomy/skin-sparing mastectomy in patients with radiologic distance less than 2 cm, but without NME extension to the nipple.ConclusionsNSM is an acceptable procedure in patients with breast cancer with a low incidence of pathologic nipple invasion when there is no evidence of NME extension to the nipple on preoperative breast MRI.     

Nipple sparing mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction: a short term analysis of our experience

Breast cancer surgery has greatly changed over the past decades; nowadays skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and immediate reconstruction is considered a valid oncological option to achieve good aesthetic results. The success of SSM led to several studies aimed to investigate NAC involvement whose removal increases the patient's sense of mutilation. In this study the Authors investigate the incidence of recurrences in nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) comparing it with the other techniques to assess the actual risk of tumor involvement of the NAC; besides, they analyse the patients' satisfaction and the NSM impact on quality of life through the utilization of a questionnaire. Clinical complications, aesthetic as well as oncological and psychological results have been analysed. They conclude that in selected cases NSM can be performed without additional risks because the incidence of recurrence after NSM is similar to that of radical mastectomy. Moreover, the aesthetic and psychological outcome are considered positive by the patients.     

Clinical outcomes following nipple–areola-sparing mastectomy with immediate implant-based breast reconstruction: a 12-year experience with an analysis of patient and breast-related factors for complications

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasingly offered to women for therapeutic and prophylactic indications. Although, clinical series have been described, there are few studies describing risk factors for complications. The objective of this study is to evaluate the incidence of complications in a series of consecutive patients submitted to NSM and differences between clinical risk factors, breast volume, and different incision types. In a cohort-designed study, 158 reconstructed patients (invasive/in situ cancer and high risk for cancer) were stratified into groups based on different types of incision used (hemi-periareolar, double-circle periareolar, and Wise-pattern). They were matched for age, body mass index, associated clinical diseases, smoking, and weight of specimen. Also included were patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy and postoperative radiotherapy. Mean follow-up was 65.6 months. In 106 (67 %) patients, NSM was performed for breast cancer treatment and in 52 (32.9 %) for cancer prophylaxis. Thirty-nine (24.6 %) patients were submitted to hemi-periareolar technique, 67 (42.4 %) to double-circle periareolar incision, and 52 (33 %) to Wise-pattern incision. The reconstruction was performed with tissue expander and implant–expander. Local recurrence rate was 3.7 % and the incidence of distant metastases was 1.8 %. Obese patients and higher weight of specimen had a higher risk for complications. After adjusting risk factors (BMI, weight of specimen), the complications were higher for patients submitted to hemi-periareolar and Wise-pattern incisions. This follow-up survey demonstrates that NSM facilitates optimal breast reconstruction by preserving the majority of the breast skin. Selected patients can have safe outcomes and therefore this may be a feasible option for breast cancer management. Success depends on coordinated planning with the oncologic surgeon and careful preoperative and intraoperative management. Surgical risk factors include incision type, obesity, and weight of breast specimen.