No abstract

Objective:The aim of this study was to compare robotic mastectomy with open classical technique outcomes in breast cancer patients.Summary Background Data:As the use of robotic nipple sparing mastectomy continues to rise, improved understanding of the surgical, oncologic, and quality of life outcomes is imperative for appropriate patient selection as well as to better understand indications, limits, advantages, and dangers.Methods:In a phase III, open label, single-center, randomized controlled trial involving 80 women with breast cancer (69) or with BRCA mutation (11), we compared the outcome of robotic and open nipple sparing mastectomy. Primary outcomes were surgical complications and quality of life using specific validated questionnaires. Secondary objective included oncologic outcomes.Results:Robotic procedure was 1 hour and 18 minutes longer than open (P < 0.001). No differences in the number or type of complications (P = 0.11) were observed. Breast-Q scores in satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, physical and sexual well-being were significantly higher after robotic mastectomy versus open procedure. Respect to baseline, physical and sexual well-being domains remained stable after robotic mastectomy, whereas they significantly decreased after open procedure (P < 0.02). The overall Body Image Scale questionnaire score was 20.7 ± 13.8 versus 9.9 ± 5.1 in the robotic versus open groups respectively, P < 0.0001. At median follow-up 28.6months (range 3.7–43.3), no local events were observed.Conclusions:Complications were similar among groups upholding the robotic technique to be safe. Quality of life was maintained after robotic mastectomy while significantly decrease after open surgery. Early follow-up confirm no premature local failure.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03440398

Background: Microinvasive breast cancer is an uncommon pathological entity. Owing to the rarity of this condition, its surgical axillary management and overall prognosis remain controversial.Methods: A database was analysed to identify patients with microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who had surgery for invasive breast cancer at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, between 1998 and 2010. Women who had undergone axillary staging by sentinel lymph node biopsy were included in the study.Results: Of 257 women with microinvasive breast cancer who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), 226 (87⋅9 per cent) had negative sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) and 31 had metastatic SLNs. Twelve patients had isolated tumour cells (ITCs), 14 had micrometastases and five had macrometastases in sentinel nodes. Axillary lymph node dissection was performed in 16 of the 31 patients with positive SLNs. After a median follow-up of 11 years, only one regional first event was observed in the 15 patients with positive SLNs who did not undergo axillary lymph node dissection. There were no regional first events in the 16 patients with positive SLNs who had axillary dissection.Conclusion: Good disease-free and overall survival were found in women with positive SLNs and microinvasive DCIS. This study is in line with studies showing that SLNB in microinvasive DCIS may not be useful, and supports the evidence that less surgery can provide the same level of overall survival with better quality of life.Snapshots in Surgery: to view submission guidelines, submit your snapshot and view the archive, please visit www.bjs.co.uk placed via the suprapubic trocar at the end of surgery. After operation, the urinary catheter bag was found to be filled Snapshot quiz

E-cadherin (CDH1 gene) germline mutations are associated with the development of diffuse gastric cancer in the context of the so-called hereditary diffuse gastric syndrome, and with an inherited predisposition of lobular breast carcinoma. In 2019, the international gastric cancer linkage consortium revised the clinical criteria and established guidelines for the genetic screening of CDH1 germline syndromes. Nevertheless, the introduction of multigene panel testing in clinical practice has led to an increased identification of E-cadherin mutations in individuals without a positive family history of gastric or breast cancers. This observation motivated us to review and present a novel multidisciplinary clinical approach (nutritional, surgical, and image screening) for single subjects who present germline CDH1 mutations but do not fulfil the classic clinical criteria, namely those identified as—(1) incidental finding and (2) individuals with lobular breast cancer without family history of gastric cancer (GC).

No abstract

Purpose The aim of this study was to report the rate of survivorship in patients with osteonecrosis of the femoral head treated with core decompression in association with mesenchymal stem cells (MSCs) implantation, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) injection, and synthetic bone graft. Methods We evaluated 24 hips in 16 patients, according to Ficat classification, treated by core decompression, injection of PRP and MSCs, and backfilling of the core tract with synthetic bone graft. Survivorship was estimated using Kaplan–Meier curves. Results The survivorship of core decompression in association with the procedure is 50% at 75 months of follow-up. The survival rate was 80% for patients in early stage and 28.6% for patients in advanced stage at 75 months. When we compared Kaplan–Meier survival curves of patients in stage III + IV and patients in stage I + II, we noticed that the survival functions are statistically different (p < 0.05, log-rank test), particularly in stage I + II where we had a greater surviving core decompression, in comparison to patients in stage III + IV. Conclusion This technique is safe and good preliminary results were obtained in patients with early stages of the disease with no reported complications. Level of Evidence Level IV, therapeutic case series.

No abstract

Hereditary Diffuse Gastric Cancer (HDGC) is a complex inherited syndrome caused by CDH1 germline mutations. DGC is the hallmark cancer of this genetic predisposition, but several other cancers are associated with these CDH1 mutations. In this review, we revised all studies reporting CDH1 mutations in non-GC patients. The selected studies included: (a) families aggregating with GC and other cancers, both, and (b) families presenting only non-gastric tumors association. Among non-gastric tumors, our results show that CDH1 mutations are most frequently identified in breast cancer. The frequency of missense mutations is higher in the non-GC group, as the age at diagnosis in this group. Moreover, the predominant CDH1 mutation affects the extracellular domain. Our data suggest that CDH1 genetic testing should be considered also in other cancers, especially breast tumors.