Skin-sparing (SSM) and nipple-sparing (NSM) mastectomies relatively new conservative surgical approaches to breast cancer. In SSM most of the breast skin is conserved to create a pocket that facilitates immediate breast reconstruction with implant or autologous graft to achieve a quality cosmetic outcome. NSM is closely similar except that the nipple-areola complex (NAC) is also conserved. Meta-analyses indicate that outcomes for SSM and NSM do not differ from those for non-conservative mastectomies. Recurrence rates in the NAC after NSM are acceptably low (0-3.7%). Other studies indicate that NSM is associated with high patient satisfaction and good psychological adjustment. Indications are carcinoma or DCIS that require mastectomy (including after neoadjuvant chemotherapy). NSM is also suitable for women undergoing risk-reducing bilateral mastectomy. Tumor not less than 2cm from the NAC is recommended, but may be less important than no evidence of nipple involvement on mandatory intraoperative nipple margin assessment. A positive margin is an absolute contraindication for nipple preservation. Other contraindications are microcalcifications close to the subareolar region and a positive nipple discharge. Complication rates are similar to those for other types of post-mastectomy reconstructions. The main complication of NSM is NAC necrosis, however as surgeon experience matures, frequency declines. Factors associated with complications are voluminous breast, ptosis, smoking, obesity, and radiotherapy. Since the access incision is small, breast tissue may be left behind, so only experienced breast surgeons should do these operations; close collaboration with the plastic surgeon. For breast cancer patients requiring mastectomy, NSM should be the option of choice.

No abstract

No abstract

The findings in this large series, with a median follow-up of nearly 8 years, indicate that NSM is oncologically safe for selected patients. The rate of NAC loss was acceptably low.

Introduction: Group B Streptococcus (GBS), a source of neonatal infection, colonizes the gastrointestinal and genitourinary tracts of pregnant women. Routine screening for maternal GBS in late pregnancy and consequent intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis have reduced the incidence of early-onset GBS neonatal infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of PCR, compared to culture (gold standard), in GBS colonization screening of pregnant women, and to establish the prevalence of GBS colonization among this population. Methods: Vaginal introitus and perianal samples were collected from 204 pregnant women, between the 35 th and 37 th weeks of pregnancy, at the Obstetrics and Gynecology Unit of the University of Caxias do Sul General Hospital between June 2008 and September 2009. All samples were cultured after enrichment in a selective medium and then assayed by culture and PCR methods. Results: The culture and PCR methods yielded detection rates of vaginal/perianal GBS colonization of 22.5% and 26%, respectively (sensitivity 100%; specificity 95.6%; positive and negative predictive values 86.8% and 100%, respectively). A higher prevalence of GBS colonization was detected in the combined vaginal and perianal samples by both culture and PCR assay analyses. Conclusions: PCR is a faster and more efficient method for GBS screening, allowing for optimal identification of women who should receive intrapartum antibiotic prophylaxis to prevent newborn infection.

Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website.Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre -including this research content -immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.COVID-19: The European institute of oncology as a "hub" centre for breast cancer surgery during the pandemic in Milan (Lombardy region, northern Italy) -A screenshot of the first month

No abstract

Background and Objectives: cT4 breast cancer (BC) is classified as noninflammatory breast cancer (non-IBC) or inflammatory breast cancer (IBC). The outcome often is considered worse. The purpose of this study was to determine recurrence and outcomes in overall survival (OS), invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS) according to pathological complete response (pCR), and inflammatory status.Methods: From 2000 to 2015 we selected 634 nonmetastatic cT4 BC patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy followed by surgery at the European Institute of Oncology. OS, IDFS, and DDFS were estimated with the Kaplan-Meier method.Results: The median follow-up was 9.0 years. Twenty patients underwent only sentinel node biopsy (SNB), 13 SNB + AD, and 601 only AD. Considering the 614 patients with AD, only 2.5% of non-IBC patients reported pCR compared to 15% of IBC cases. Only two axillary recurrences were reported. Ten-year results were 52.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 47.8-56.5) for OS, 37.0% (95% CI: 32.6-41.3) for IDFS, and 49.8% (95% CI: 45.0-54.4) for DDFS. OS, IDFS, and DDFS were better in all BC with pCR (irrespective of inflammatory status). Conclusion:Our long-term results demonstrated that pCR significantly improves survival, reducing locoregional and distant recurrence risk in cT4 tumors with respect to patients with no pCR and according to inflammatory status of cT4 BC.