Nipple-sparing Mastectomy: What the Radiologist Should                     Know

Lee, Samantha C; Mendez-Broomberg, Karen; Eacobacci, Katherine; Vincoff, Nina S.; Gupta, Ekta; McElligott, Suzanne E.

doi:10.1148/rg.210136

Cited by 8 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 56 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Breast MRI is a recommended method for diagnosing the spread of breast cancer, as studies indicate its effectiveness in detecting DCIS, surpassing the sensitivity of mammography [30][31][32]. Moreover, it is particularly valuable in assessing nipple involvement to identify potential candidates for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) [33].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: A single-center study

Nashimoto,

Asano,

Matsui

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background In invasive breast cancer, there is no difference in mid- and long-term oncological safety results between nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) and simple mastectomy (SM). However, there are few reports on ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). This study aimed to compare the local recurrence and survival rates of the three techniques (NSM, SSM, and SM) in Japanese patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS. Methods Patients undergoing NSM, SSM, and SM at our institution between 2006 and 2015 were identified, and their outcomes were analyzed. Results The mean follow-up period was 80.4 months (standard deviation [SD]: 37.1 months). NSM was performed in 152 cases, SSM in 49, and SM in 44. Five of 245 patients developed local recurrences. Four of these patients had invasive cancer. The primary endpoints of 5-year cumulative local recurrence were 2.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.0–5.0) for NSM, 2.2% (95% CI: 0.0–6.3) for SSM, and 0% (95% CI: 0.0–0.0) for SM. There were no significant differences in the 5-year local recurrence rate. Conclusions In conclusion, in our single-center, retrospective study, SSM and NSM showed oncological safety for DCIS that was comparable to that of conventional simple mastectomy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of locoregional recurrence risk among nipple-sparing mastectomy, skin-sparing mastectomy, and simple mastectomy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ: A single-center study

Nashimoto,

Asano,

Matsui

et al. 2024

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mammography remains the standard tool used for postoperative screening of patients who underwent breast conservation therapy [5,6]. Although the use of breast MRI has increased over the past few years in patients who were surgically treated for breast cancer, controversy remains regarding its use as a screening tool for those patients [7,8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Recently many studies reported that DCE-MRI showed much higher sensitivity than mammography in the characterization of postoperative breast masses [1,7]. Although high sensitivity, dynamic contrast-enhanced breast MRI lacks high specificity and so causes many false-positive results [9,10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prediction of local breast cancer recurrence after surgery: the added value of diffusion tensor imaging

Rakhawy

Soliman

Elnahas

et al. 2022

Egypt J Radiol Nucl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background There is considerable overlap between benign postoperative changes and recurrent breast cancer imaging features in patients surgically treated for breast cancer. This study aims to evaluate the value of adding multiple diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) parameters, including mean diffusivity (MD), fractional anisotropy (FA), radial diffusivity (RD), axial diffusivity, (AD), and relative anisotropy (RA) in differentiating breast cancer recurrence from postoperative changes in patients who were surgically treated for breast cancer and to also evaluate the role of these parameters in characterizing the different pathologies seen in the postoperative breast. Results This is a prospective study that was performed on female patients who were surgically treated for breast cancer. The study was done on 60 cases having 77 breast lesions. (Sixty-two of them were described as mass lesions and 15 of them were described as non-mass enhancement on MRI.) Among analyzed DTI parameters, MD showed the highest sensitivity (97.1%), specificity (88.1%), and accuracy (92.2%) in predicting recurrent breast cancer. FA, AD, and RD showed sensitivity (77.1%, 85.7%, and 88.6%) and specificity (83.3%, 83.3%, and 73.8%) in predicting recurrent breast cancer, respectively. The median MD values were lower in grade III recurrent breast cancers when compared to its values in recurrent grade II breast cancers and recurrent DCIS (0.6 × 10–3 mm2/s vs. 0.8 × 10–3 mm2/s and 0.9 × 10–3 mm2/s), respectively. FA also showed median values in grade III recurrent breast cancer higher than its values in grade II recurrent breast cancer and recurrent DCIS (0.6 vs. 0.5 and 0.39), respectively. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, accuracy, F1 score, and MCC of DCE-MRI alone versus DCE-MRI plus combined DTI parameters were 88.6% versus 100%, 88.1% versus 90.5%, 86.1% versus 89.7%, 90.2% versus 100%, 88.3% versus 94.6%, 87.3% versus 94.6%, and 76.5% versus 90.1%, respectively. Conclusions DTI may play an important role as a complementary method to discriminate recurrent breast cancer from postoperative changes in patients surgically treated for previous breast cancer.

show abstract