Therapeutic, II.

Breast cancer treatment must nowadays optimize cosmetic results. This can be accomplished in selected cases by means of a single-stage operation that the authors call "skin-reducing mastectomy." The final scars imitate those of cosmetic surgery. Careful patient selection and improvement in the learning curve may reduce the complication rate.

No abstract

PurposeIndications for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) have broadened to include the risk reducing setting and locally advanced tumors, which resulted in a dramatic increase in the use of NSM. The Oncoplastic Breast Consortium consensus conference on NSM and immediate reconstruction was held to address a variety of questions in clinical practice and research based on published evidence and expert panel opinion.MethodsThe panel consisted of 44 breast surgeons from 14 countries across four continents with a background in gynecology, general or reconstructive surgery and a practice dedicated to breast cancer, as well as a patient advocate. Panelists presented evidence summaries relating to each topic for debate during the in-person consensus conference. The iterative process in question development, voting, and wording of the recommendations followed the modified Delphi methodology.ResultsConsensus recommendations were reached in 35, majority recommendations in 24, and no recommendations in the remaining 12 questions. The panel acknowledged the need for standardization of various aspects of NSM and immediate reconstruction. It endorsed several oncological contraindications to the preservation of the skin and nipple. Furthermore, it recommended inclusion of patients in prospective registries and routine assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Considerable heterogeneity in breast reconstruction practice became obvious during the conference.ConclusionsIn case of conflicting or missing evidence to guide treatment, the consensus conference revealed substantial disagreement in expert panel opinion, which, among others, supports the need for a randomized trial to evaluate the safest and most efficacious reconstruction techniques.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-018-4937-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Introduction. The rapid spread of COVID-19 across the globe is forcing surgical oncologists to change their daily practice. We sought to evaluate how breast surgeons are adapting their surgical activity to limit viral spread and spare hospital resources. Methods. A panel of 12 breast surgeons from the most affected regions of the world convened a virtual meeting the 7 th of April 2020 to discuss the changes in their local surgical practice during the COVID-19 pandemic. Similarly, a web-based poll based was created to evaluate changes in surgical practice among breast surgeons from several countries. Results. The virtual meeting showed that distinct countries and regions were experiencing different phases of the pandemic. Surgical priority was given to patients with aggressive disease not candidate for primary systemic therapy, those with progressive disease under neoadjuvant systemic therapy, and post-neoadjuvant patients. One hundred breast surgeons filled out the poll. The trend showed reductions in operating room schedules, indications for surgery, and consultations, with an increasingly restrictive approach to elective surgery with worsening of the pandemic. Conclusion. The COVID-19 emergency should not compromise treatment of a potentially lethal disease such as breast cancer. Our results reveal that physicians are instinctively reluctant to abandon conventional standards of care when possible. However, as the situation deteriorates, alternative strategies of de-escalation are being adopted. The Oncologist 2020;9999:• •

The QLQ-BRECON23 is an internationally validated tool to be used alongside the EORTC QLQ-C30 (cancer) and QLQ-BR23 (breast cancer) questionnaires for evaluating quality of life and satisfaction after breast reconstruction.

In this study we performed 77 procedures on 65 patients fulfilling the oncological criteria for skin-sparing mastectomy and presenting with large or medium size breasts. All the operations were performed as a single-stage procedure with an anatomical prosthesis allocated into a compound pouch, made up of the pectoralis major, serratus anterior fascia, and a lower dermal adipose flap. The medium size of the anatomical implants employed was 444.3 cc. The implant removal rate was 14.2%. At a median follow-up of 36 months we reported a 0.5% local recurrence rate per year. The overall specific survival rate was 98.2%. This study confirms the safety and effectiveness of this technical variation of skin and nipple-sparing mastectomies. All breast, irrespective of mammary shape and size, can be reconstructed with medium size implants and, if required, contralateral adjustments. The overall complication rate is in keeping with previous studies.

Despite the central role of breast reconstruction in women with breast cancer, the best implants to use in reconstructive surgery have been studied rarely in the context of RCTs. Furthermore the quality of these studies and the overall evidence they provide is largely unsatisfactory. Some of our results can be interpreted as early evidence of potentially large differences between different surgical approaches, which should be confirmed in new high-quality RCTs that include a larger number of women. These days - even after a few million women have had breasts reconstructed - surgeons cannot inform women about the risks and complications of different implant-based breast reconstructive options on the basis of results derived from RCTs.