No abstract

Recurrence that poses the biggest problem after breast-conserving surgery is local recurrence. Particularly, in the case of inflammatory breast recurrence which is rare but has a specific pathologic nature, it is important to elucidate the pathology and risk factors and to consider appropriate countermeasures. In the present study, we classified 133 cases of recurrence following breast-conserving surgery, collected from 18 key hospitals/institutes in Japan. Recurrence types were divided into three groups, namely, inflammatory breast recurrence, noninflammatory breast recurrence and distant metastasis only, and the risk factors involved in recurrence were investigated by the case control study allotting 2 controls to each case. The study population consisted of 9 cases of the inflammatory type, 64 cases of the noninflammatory type and 60 cases of distant metastasis. The significant risk factor for inflammatory breast recurrence was positive lymph node metastasis, which was significantly more frequent in lymphatic invasion-positive cases unlike in the distant metastasis group. The positive surgical margin and nonradiation therapy which have been shown to be significant risk factors for noninflammatory breast recurrence were entirely unrelated with inflammatory breast recurrence. In addition, the inflammatory-type recurrence time was as short as about 12 months irrespective of whether radiation therapy was performed or not. The inflammatory type was accompanied with local wide extension (cancerous embolus of the dermal lymphatic vessels), and distant metastasis (lymphangitis carcinomatosa) at the time of recurrence, and further surgery was impossible in most cases, with a significantly poorer prognosis than the other recurrence types. These findings suggest that this recurrence corresponds to the so-called ‘occult’ case of primary inflammatory breast carcinoma. We think it important to predict this recurrence by close pathological examination, particularly in patients with lymph node metastasis, and to consider appropriate measures.

The effect of bevacizumab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw on previously osseointegrated dental implants has not been adequately studied. Here, we report a case of osteonecrosis of the jaw detected around dental implants placed prior to bevacizumab therapy. A 66-year-old woman undergoing bevacizumab therapy for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer, developed malocclusion following buccal gingival swelling and pain in the #18, #19, and #20 tooth region. The patient visited a local dental clinic, where existing implants in relation to #19 and #20 were removed. Subsequently, the patient visited our department, and intraoral examination revealed necrotic bone in the region corresponding to #19 and #20. Radiographic examination showed a pathological fracture in this region that was considered to result from osteonecrosis of the jaw. Bevacizumab therapy was suspended temporarily till the acute inflammation had subsided. In addition, treatment with antibacterial agents and conservative surgery was considered. Complete soft tissue coverage was observed 14 days following surgery. In recent years, the number of patients receiving bevacizumab treatment has increased. Since bevacizumab-related osteonecrosis of the jaw could occur around previously osseointegrated dental implants as well, this case report suggests an effective treatment regimen based on a combination of antibacterial agents and conservative surgery.

In maxillofacial reconstruction implant treatment, unsatisfactory soft tissue treatment of the area around the implant may lead to inflammation. As a result, appropriate soft tissue treatment is critical. To the best of our knowledge, there are no studies that compare the different tissue treatment methods available. Hence, in this study, we compare three soft tissue treatment methods around implants after mandibular reconstruction is achieved with a fibula-free flap. Out of 33 patients who underwent mandible reconstruction using fibula-free flaps between 2006 and 2015, 5 were selected for this study. A total of 17 implants were used for treatment by the final prosthetics of the five patients. Three soft tissue treatment methods with free gingival graft (FGG) were evaluated, namely, installing a splint in a modified abutment to protect the wounded area during a palatal mucosa transplant (method 1), installing a splint or dentures to a locator abutment (method 2), and the use of screw-in fixed dentures (method 3). The method that could guarantee the widest keratinized mucosa was the screw-in fixed denture method. The results of our study indicated that employing screw-in fixed dentures for FGG may be a useful soft tissue treatment for mandible reconstruction implants.

No abstract