Background In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the American Society of Breast Surgeons and American College of Radiology released a joint statement recommending that all breast screening studies be postponed effective March 26, 2020. Study Design A retrospective review of all canceled mammograms at a single tertiary care institution from January 1-August 31, 2020 was performed to evaluate the effect of this recommendation by quantifying both the number and reason for mammogram cancellations before and after March 26, 2020. Utilization of the electronic patient portal for appointment cancellation as a surrogate for telehealth uptake was noted. Results During the study period, 5340 mammogram appointments were kept and 2784 mammogram appointments were canceled. From a baseline of 30 (10.8%) canceled mammograms in January, cancellations peaked in March (576, 20.6%) and gradually decreased to a low in August (197, 7%). Reasons for cancellations varied significantly by month ( P < .0001) and included COVID-19 related (236, 8.5%), unspecified patient reasons (1,210, 43.5%), administrative issues (147, 5.3%), provider requests (46, 1.7%), sooner appointments available (31, 1.1%), and reasons not given (486, 17.5%). In addition, compared to a baseline in January (51, 16.5%), electronic patient portal access peaked in August (67, 34.0%). Conclusion Screening mammogram cancellations have gradually recovered after early COVID-19 restrictions were lifted and increasing use of electronic patient access appears to be sustained. Consequences for future staging at the time of diagnosis remain unknown. Understanding to what extent the pandemic affected screening may help surgeons plan for post-pandemic breast cancer care.

Breast cancer detection in women with implants has been questioned. We sought to evaluate the impact of breast implants on mammographic outcomes. A retrospective review of women undergoing mammography between March 1 and October 30, 2013 was performed. Demographic characteristics and mammogram results were compared between women with and without breast implants. Overall, 4.8 per cent of 1863 women identified during the study period had breast implants. Median age was 59 years (26–93). Women with implants were younger (53.9 vs 59.2 years, P < 0.0001), had lower body mass index (25.4 vs 28.9, P < 0.0001), and were more likely to have dense breast tissue (72.1% vs 56.4%, P = 0.004) than those without. There were no statistically significant differences with regards to Breast Imaging Recording and Data System 0 score (13.3% with implants vs 21.4% without), call back exam (18.9% with vs 24.1% without), time to resolution of abnormal imaging (58.6 days with vs 43.3 without), or cancer detection rate (0% with implants vs 1.0% without). Because implants did not significantly affect mammogram results, women with implants should be reassured that mammography remains useful in detecting cancer. However, future research is required to determine whether lower call back rates and longer time to resolution of imaging findings contribute to delays in diagnosis in patients with implants.

Results of this phase I study demonstrate that PNB of the SLN is technically feasible, but further refinement of technique is warranted to improve correlation of core biopsy to SLND.

No abstract

No abstract