Level 2 Oncoplastic Surgery for Lower Inner Quadrant Breast Cancers: The LIQ-V Mammoplasty

Clough, Krishna B.; Odén, S.; Ihraï, T.; Massey, Eleanore; Nos, Claude; Sarfati, Isabelle

doi:10.1245/s10434-013-3085-4

Cited by 26 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The main advantage of OPS techniques is to allow much wider excisions than with standard BCS. In different series of mammoplasty techniques (level 2 OPS), mean (min‐max) weights of the excision specimen were of 101 g (17–210 g) , 188 g (8–1,700 g) , 198 g (20–2,100 g) , and 222 g (20–1,450 g) , about four times heavier than the reported 10–50 g for traditional BCS.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

“…In specialized units, OPS Level 2 is performed in about 10% of BCT patients and relies on various mammoplasty techniques, according to tumor localization . These include not only the superior pedicle and the inferior pedicle techniques but also tailored mammoplasties that were specifically developed for breast cancer .…”

Section: Establishing Ops As a Standard Of Carementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oncoplastic Surgery: Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery

Clough¹,

Benyahi²,

Nos³

et al. 2015

Breast J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In recent decades, the surgical management of breast cancer has steadily and considerably improved. Mutilating procedures have given way to more individualized surgical approaches aiming to preserve the breast as much as possible. For large tumors, preoperative chemotherapy is a major tool, but emerging oncoplastic surgery techniques are also a new approach in the armamentarium of breast cancer surgery, as a third option between conventional breast-conserving surgery and mastectomy. As this new treatment modality allows wider margin excision, it reduces the need for re-excision procedures and possibly increases breast conservation rates by extending the indications of breast-conserving surgery. This review will provide an overview of current practices and clinical data available to date on oncoplastic surgery.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 89%

Section: Establishing Ops As a Standard Of Carementioning

confidence: 99%

Oncoplastic Surgery: Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery

Clough¹,

Benyahi²,

Nos³

et al. 2015

Breast J

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reshaping of the remaining mammary gland is performed by medial advancement of the residual lower quadrants after cutting the submammary fold and completely undermining the lower pole. This mammoplasty leaves a V scar formed by the radial and inframammary incisions and a periareolar scar [14,24]…”

Section: Inferior-internal Quadrant (7-9 O' Clock)mentioning

confidence: 99%

Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Review of Techniques Quadrant Per Quadrant

Gardani¹,

Bertozzi²,

Pio³

et al. 2018

MEDJ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast Conserving Surgery (BCS) has gradually substituted mastectomy in the treatment of early-stage tumors. Indeed it ensures the same overall survival and better aesthetic results when followed post-operative radiotherapy. Nevertheless more than 20% excision of breast tissue, retro-areolar or lower pole cancer, and higer-sized breasts with ptosis, tend to result in aesthetically unpleasant results. Oncoplastic breast surgery finds its route into breast conserving surgery in the attempt to improve the aesthetic results while not compromising the oncologic ones.

show abstract

“…The OPS techniques performed were round block 40.3% (21/52), inverted T mammoplasty 26.8% (14/52), vertical scar mammoplasty 15.3% (8/52), racquet mammoplasty 7.6% (4/52), horizontal mammoplasty 5.7% (3/52), and LIQ V mammoplasty [4, 7, 11] 3.8% (2/52) (Figure 3). 51.9% (27/52) of patients had symmetrization procedures performed, distributed according to the period of the study as follows: 77.2% (17/22) in 2011, 56.6% (17/30) in 2012.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The scores for the cosmetic outcome and the level of satisfaction were recorded in a punctuation described in previous experiences being 1 = bad, 2 = poor, 3 = fair, 4 = good, and 5 = excellent [5, 6, 10, 11]. The cosmetic outcome was recorded during the follow up by the surgeon, by phone calls, and photographs were reviewed by a panel of four observers: one breast surgeon, two surgical oncologists, and one plastic surgeon.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

ecancermedicalscience

Acosta-Marín¹,

Acosta-Freites²,

Contreras³

et al.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundBreast-conserving surgery (BCS) may sometimes lead to deformities in the remaining breast. Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) aims to improve our aesthetic results even in the case of major volume resections. The purpose of this study is to provide an objective evaluation of our initial experience with OPS, mainly based on the levels of satisfaction reported by both patients and surgeons.Patients and MethodsThis prospective study was performed at CECLINES in Caracas, Venezuela, between January 2011 and October 2012. It involved 107 consecutive patients in two groups: 52 patients with level II OPS versus 55 patients with ‘standard’ BCS (SBCS). We evaluated the level of satisfaction and cosmetic outcome at 6 and 12 months post-operation using a score from 1 (bad) to 5 (excellent). The cosmetic score was recorded during the follow-up by the surgeon, by phone calls, and photographs were reviewed by a panel of four observers.ResultsThe participation rate in the cosmetic outcome/level of satisfaction evaluation was 100% at 6 months and 96.2% at 12 months. The average tumour size was 23 mm [standard deviation (SD): 13.5] for the OPS group versus 17.6 mm (SD: 8.3) for the SBCS group (p = 0.017). The average weight for the surgical specimen was 101 g (range: 30–512 g) in the OPS group versus 60.4 g (range: 20–135 g) in the SBCS group (p = 0.004). The OPS techniques most performed were round block 40.3% (21/52), inverted T mammoplasty 26.8% (14/52) and vertical scar mammoplasty 15.3% (8/52). Of all the patients, 51.9% (27/52) had symmetrisation procedures performed distributed according to the period of the study: 77.2% (17/22) in 2011, 56.6% (17/30) in 2012, and 18.1% (6/33) in 2013. The rate of complications was 5.7% (3/52) in the OPS group and 0% for the SBCS group (p < 0.005). The average cosmetic score at 6 months by patients in the OPS group was 4.4; patient satisfaction scores of 4 (good) and 5 (excellent) were 88.4%. In the SBCS group at 6 months, the mean score reported by patients was 4.2, with scores 4–5 being 83.4% (p = 0.644). The cosmetic score by surgeons in the OPS group at 6 months was 4.5; the surgeon satisfaction scores of 4–5 were 94.2%. In the SBCS group, the surgeons’ mean score at 6 months was 4.1, with 84.5% of scores being 4 or 5 (p < 0.005). The final cosmetic score by patients in the OPS group at 12 months was 4.5; patient satisfaction scores of 4–5 were 90.4%. In the SBCS group, the final mean score at 12 months by patients was 4.2, with 77.5% of scores being 4 or 5 (p < 0.005). The final cosmetic score by surgeons in the OPS group at 12 months was 4.5; surgeon satisfaction scores of 4–5 were 92.3%. In the SBCS group, the surgeons’ final mean score at 12 months was 4.1, with 84.5% of scores being 4 or 5 (p < 0.005).ConclusionsOPS provides good satisfaction rates. An SBCS when an OPS is not indicated mostly results in good satisfaction levels and cosmetic scores. Usually, the results remain stable after 6 months. The use of OPS allows the excision of bigger lesions and surgical specimens. Symmet...

show abstract

Level 2 Oncoplastic Surgery for Lower Inner Quadrant Breast Cancers: The LIQ-V Mammoplasty

Cited by 26 publications

References 25 publications

Oncoplastic Surgery: Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery

Oncoplastic Surgery: Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery

Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Review of Techniques Quadrant Per Quadrant

ecancermedicalscience

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About