PurposeAlthough various strategies have been reported, there are no defined criteria for cosmetic evaluation methods after breast-conserving surgery (BCS). Since Asians tend to have smaller breasts, indistinct inframammary folds, and conspicuous scars, differences in the cosmetic results are expected. So we examined two subjective methods and one objective method to determine the differences, and elements necessary for a cosmetic evaluation after BCS.MethodsFrontal photographs of 190 Japanese were evaluated using the Harris scale (Harris) and the evaluation method proposed by the Japanese Breast Cancer Society Sawai group (Sawai group) as the subjective methods, and the Breast Cancer Conservation Treatment cosmetic results (BCCT.core) as the objective method, respectively. In order to examine the necessary elements for developing a new ideal method, 100 out of 190 were selected and assessed separately by six raters using both the Harris and modified Sawai group methods in the observer assessment. The correlation between the two methods was examined using the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient.ResultsThe results of the BCCT.core and the other two methods were clearly different. In the observer assessment, the consensuses of the six raters were evaluated as follows: 27, 27, 26, and 20 cases were evaluated as "excellent," "good," "fair," and "poor," respectively. For the Spearman rank-correlation coefficient, values higher than 0.7 indicated a strong correlation, as seen by the values of 0.909 for the breast shape and 0.345 for the scar. The breast shape accounted for the most significant part of the evaluation, and the scar had very little correlation.ConclusionIn this study, we recognized a clear difference between the subjective and objective evaluation methods, and identified the necessary elements for cosmetic evaluation. We would like to continue developing an ideal cosmetic evaluation that is similar to subjective one and is independent from raters.

No abstract

An abdominal advancement flap (AAF) is a flap that pulls the elevated abdominal skin up and creates the shape of the inferior portion of the breast by making a neo-inframammary fold. Seven patients underwent remodeling using an AAF or a method combining an AAF with other volume displacement techniques after partial mastectomy. The excision volume ranged from 15% to 35%. AAF with only mobilization of the gland flaps was performed in two cases, with lateral mammoplasty in one case, with the round block technique (RBT) in one case, with a modified RBT in one case, and with medial mammoplasty in two cases. Although one patient treated with a RBT had a partial blood-flow insufficiency of the nipple-areola complex, it improved with conservative treatment. The cosmetic results were found to be excellent in three cases, good in three, and fair in one case.

We introduce a method combining two oncoplastic techniques for breast-conserving reconstruction. The procedure is as follows: first, an extended glandular flap is made by undermining the breast from both the skin and the pectoralis fascia to the upper edge of the breast at the subclavicular area. After modeling the breast mound with the extended glandular flap, an inframammary adipofascial flap is made. The flap is reflected back to the breast area remodeled using the extended glandular flap. After reshaping the breast, the inframammary line is then re-shaped. This method is indicated for patients with breast cancer in the outer portion of the breast, who have small dense breasts, and have undergone a large excision of about 40% of their breast volume. We treated four patients, all of whom had either excellent or good cosmetic results with no fat necrosis.

Background: Off-label dosing of direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) as a treatment for non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) is problematic. Here, we investigated the status of rivaroxaban and edoxaban dosing by monitoring plasma concentrations (PCs). Methods and Results:We monitored drug PCs in 391 and 333 outpatients receiving rivaroxaban and edoxaban, respectively, for NVAF. Drug doses were adjusted if the PC was above the cut-off value (rivaroxaban: 404 ng/mL; edoxaban: 402 ng/mL), determined from receiver operating characteristic curves for predicting bleeding events. On-label standard dosing was reduced to off-label underdosing due to high PCs above the cut-off more often for rivaroxaban (28.1%) than edoxaban (12.6%; P<0.001). Over a median follow-up of 13 months for rivaroxaban and 10 months for edoxaban, the annual incidence of bleeding events was higher with rivaroxaban than with edoxaban (4.88 vs. 3.73 patient-years; P<0.05), although no thromboembolic events occurred in either group. Furthermore, for patients with creatinine clearance >50 mL/min and body weight ≤60 kg, there was a greater incidence of bleeding events with rivaroxaban on-label 15 mg dosing than with edoxaban on-label 30 mg dosing (22.2% vs 2.9%; P<0.01). Conclusions:Monitoring the PCs of rivaroxaban and edoxaban in NVAF patients enables dose adjustments to reduce bleeding risk. The incidence of bleeding under drug PC monitoring was less in the edoxaban than rivaroxaban group.