Introduction Oncoplastic breast conserving surgery allows higher volume excision to achieve oncological safety with minimal aesthetic compromise. The primary outcome of this study was to assess the oncological safety in the setting of volume replacement oncoplastic breast conserving surgery. The secondary objective was to assess cosmetic outcome. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines to explore the oncological safety of oncoplastic breast conserving surgery, with particular focus on volume replacement. Resection margin rates, re-excision rates, conversion to mastectomy rates, local and distant disease recurrence, volume replacement techniques, cosmetic outcomes and patient-reported outcome measures were assessed. Findings The search criteria identified 155 articles, of which 40 met the inclusion criteria. These studies included 2,497 patients with a mean age of 47.8 years (range 38.4–59.6 years), a body mass index of 24.3kg/m2 (22.1–28.0kg/m2), with a mean follow-up of 37.1 months (6–125 months). A variety of volume replacement techniques were used, most commonly latissimus dorsi and chest wall perforator flaps. Whole mean pathological tumour size was 29.7mm (17–65mm) and mean specimen weight was 123.6g (46.5–220g). Mean re-excision rate was 7.2% and completion mastectomy rate was 2.3%. Locoregional and distant recurrence rate was 2.5% (0–8.1%) and 3.1% (0–14.6%), respectively. There were a variety of patient-reported outcome measures employed, with overall good to excellent outcomes. Conclusions This review demonstrates that volume replacement oncoplastic breast conserving surgery is a safe option in terms of re-excision, completion mastectomy rates, and local and distant recurrence. Available patient-related outcome measures and cosmetic assessment tend towards better outcomes compared with wide local excision and mastectomy. However, data are significantly limited, with a paucity of high-level evidence, and it is therefore necessary to be cautious regarding the strength and interpretation of data in this review. Further prospective studies are required on this subject.
Background: Invasive lobular cancer (ILC) of the breast can provide diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to its often mammographically occult and multifocal nature. UK guidelines recommend magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) when considering breast conserving surgery (BCS) in women with a diagnosis of ILC. A small number of studies have shown that due to its low specificity, MRI can lead to additional invasive investigations whilst rarely identifying additional tumour foci that affect management. We carried out a retrospective study of patients diagnosed with ILC to assess the impact of MRI on management and to evaluate if breast density on mammography could indicate likelihood of additional disease being found on MRI. Methods: A retrospective analysis of the electronic patient records for all cases of ILC diagnosed between January 2013 and December 2016 was carried out. Results: A total of 110 cases of ILC were identified of which 69 women were considered for BCS and 58 (84.1%) women underwent MRI. A further abnormality was seen in 22 (37.9%) patients of whom 13 (59.1%) had a further core biopsy with 4 cases being positive for malignancy. Overall MRI changed the surgical plan from BCS to mastectomy in 7 (10.1%). Breast density did not predict the presence of additional findings on MRI. Conclusions: MRI assessment of ILC rarely affects the management when BCS is considered. Having radiologically denser breasts did not correlate with increased reoperation rate. Larger prospective studies may provide further guidance on MRI specificity and breast density.
Core-biopsy of the breast is the standard of care for assessment of breast lumps. It is rarely associated with a vascular injury resulting in the formation of an arteriovenous fistula. Though previously noted in the medical literature, it has never been reported in the context of pregnancy and lactation.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.