Clinical Outcome of Reconstruction With Tissue Expanders for Patients With Breast Cancer and Mastectomy

Ota, Daisuke; Fukuuchi, Atsushi; Iwahira, Yoshiko; Kato, Takao; Takeuchi, Masashi; Okamoto, Joji; Nishi, Tsunehiro

doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2013.12.014

Cited by 15 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, Doddi et al [ 15 ] indicated that locoregional recurrence after IBR cannot be affected by inadequate excision alone, but it is more affected by other prognostic factors. Many previous reports found similar results to those in our study, demonstrating no difference between SSM or NSM and conventional mastectomies [ 8 9 11 12 16 ].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…As a result of this younger patient group, obtaining acceptable cosmetic results along and oncologic safety are important issues in treating breast cancer patients. However, there are fewer reports on the oncologic safety of IBR in Asia compared to Western countries, and these studies also lack a variable-based matched control group [ 1 11 12 ]. In this retrospective study, we performed a matched case-control study, adjusting for factors related to survival outcomes in order to reduce selection bias of patients undergoing mastectomy and IBR.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oncologic Safety of Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Invasive Breast Cancer Patients: A Matched Case Control Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to compare locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and disease-free survival (DFS) between patients undergoing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) and those undergoing mastectomy alone.MethodsA retrospective review of patients who underwent mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction for resectable invasive breast cancer between 2002 and 2010 at a single center was conducted. These cases were matched to patients who underwent mastectomy alone in the same time period, performed by 1:2 matching. Matching control variables included age, tumor size, axillary lymph node metastasis, and estrogen receptor status. Overall, 189 patients were identified in the IBR group, and 362 patients were matched to this group.ResultsIn the IBR group, 75 patients (39.7%) underwent conventional total mastectomy, 78 (41.3%) underwent skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), and 36 (19.0%) underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). The IBR group was significantly younger than the control group (41.9 and 45.1 years, respectively) (p=0.032), in spite of matching between three age groups. The DFS rates were similar between the IBR group and mastectomy alone group, at 92.0% and 89.9%, respectively, at 5-year follow-up (log-rank test, p=0.496). The 5-year LRFS was 96.2% in the IBR group and 96.4% in the mastectomy alone group (log-rank test, p=0.704), similar to data from previous reports. Subgroup analyses for SSM or NSM patients showed no differences in LRFS and DFS between the two groups. Additionally, in stage III patients, IBR did not cause an increase in recurrence.ConclusionIBR after mastectomy, including both SSM and NSM, had no negative impact on recurrence or patient survival, even in patients with advanced disease.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncologic Safety of Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Invasive Breast Cancer Patients: A Matched Case Control Study

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Autologous tissue group showed longer DFS than the implant group (90.5 vs. 57.8, p = 0.021) ( Table 3). which is consistent with the findings of previous studies [17][18][19][20].…”

supporting

confidence: 94%

Immediate Breast Reconstruction vs. Mastectomy Alone in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer; Local Recurrence and Distant Recurrence

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose: The oncologic safety of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been demonstrated. However, the outcome of IBR for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is still under debate. We compared the survival outcome of LABC patients who underwent IBR vs. mastectomy alone. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed a total of 248 patients with stage III breast cancer who were treated with mastectomy between 2004 and 2015. The study subjects were divided into 2 groups: patients who received IBR (n= 77) or mastectomy alone (MA) (n= 171). We compared disease-free survival (DFS) of both groups. Results: Median follow-up duration was 49 months and the mean age of patients was 49 years. Patients in the IBR group were significantly younger and had lower body mass index (BMI) than those in the MA group. In a univariate analysis, IBR group showed better DFS than the MA group (DFS 81.3 months vs. 49.8 months, p< 0.001). There was no delay in adjuvant treatment in the IBR group. In a multivariate analysis, IBR was associated with better DFS (hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence: 0.37, 95% CI 0.20-0.69, p= 0.002) when adjusted for potential prognostic factors. In a subgroup analysis performed according to disease stage (IIIA and IIIB/IIIC), DFS was significantly better in IBR than MA group in both stage subgroups (p< 0.001). Conclusion: We demonstrated that patients who underwent IBR showed better DFS outcome compared with patients who underwent mastectomy alone. Our results can help surgeons to determine if IBR is an option in patients with LABC.

show abstract

“…Of these 14 eligible studies, 11 were retrospective cohort studies, including 2 matched-cohort studies, 1 was an historical prospective cohort study, and 2 were prospective cohort studies. The studies included a total of 3641 cases and 9462 controls[ 19 – 32 ]. Patients of 4 studies had skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy and IBR[ 20 , 23 , 25 , 27 ], while the others had mastectomy associated with IBR[ 19 , 21 – 22 , 24 , 26 , 28 – 32 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The studies included a total of 3641 cases and 9462 controls[ 19 – 32 ]. Patients of 4 studies had skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy and IBR[ 20 , 23 , 25 , 27 ], while the others had mastectomy associated with IBR[ 19 , 21 – 22 , 24 , 26 , 28 – 32 ]. Most of the control patients underwent mastectomy; only two study enrolled patients underwent breast conservation surgery or nipple-preserving mastectomy into the control group[ 20 , 26 ].…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Prognosis of Breast Cancer Patients after Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-Analysis

Yang

Zhu

2015

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundAn increasing number of patients with breast cancer are being offered immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The aim of this study was to analyze the impact of IBR on the prognosis of patients with breast cancer.MethodsWe searched the electronic databases of Medline (Pubmed), ISI Web of Knowledge, Embase, and Google Scholar databases for studies reporting the overall recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) of patients after mastectomy only and mastectomy with IBR. With these data, we conducted a meta-analysis of the clinical outcomes.ResultsFourteen studies, including 3641 cases and 9462 controls, matched our criteria. Relevant information was extracted from these 14 studies. There was no significant heterogeneity (P for Q-statistic > 0.10 and I2 < 25%). Patients who underwent IBR showed no increased risk of overall recurrence of breast cancer (RR = 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75, 1.04; P = 0.14). Furthermore, patients receiving IBR had similar DFS (RR = 1.04; 95%CI: 0.99, 1.08); P = 0.10) and OS (RR = 1.02; 95%CI: 0.99, 1.05; P = 0.24)) as those of control patients.ConclusionThis meta-analysis provides evidence that IBR does not have an adverse effect on prognosis. These data suggest that IBR is an appropriate and safe choice for patients with breast cancer.

show abstract

Clinical Outcome of Reconstruction With Tissue Expanders for Patients With Breast Cancer and Mastectomy

Cited by 15 publications

References 31 publications

Oncologic Safety of Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Invasive Breast Cancer Patients: A Matched Case Control Study

Oncologic Safety of Immediate Breast Reconstruction for Invasive Breast Cancer Patients: A Matched Case Control Study

Immediate Breast Reconstruction vs. Mastectomy Alone in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer; Local Recurrence and Distant Recurrence

The Prognosis of Breast Cancer Patients after Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Meta-Analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About