Practical Perspectives Regarding Patient Selection and Technical Considerations in Oncoplastic Surgery

Is Oncoplastic Surgery Safe in High-Risk Breast Cancer Phenotypes?

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic surgery (OPS) has increased in popularity over the recent years. It is a form of breast conservation surgery allowing for larger partial mastectomy (PM) resections followed by either volume displacement or volume replacement reconstruction techniques. However, there is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness and safety of OPS with radiotherapy (OPS + RT) in high-risk breast cancer phenotypes, such as triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) and HER2 positive (HER2+) patients. Our aim was to compare the breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and postoperative surgical complications in OPS + RT compared to PM alone with radiation (PM + RT) and total mastectomy (MTX) without radiotherapy (MTX-RT).

METHODS

Patient data were analyzed from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registries from January 1, 2012 to December 31, 2020. Patients were stratified according to the type of surgery. Cox regression analysis was performed to assess prognostic factors of BCSS.

RESULTS

A total of 24 621 patients with high-risk breast cancer phenotypes were identified, 180 underwent OPS + RT; 13 402, PM + RT; and 11 039 MTX-RT. OPS + RT was more frequently performed in younger (mean age of 65.53 years, SD: 9.29, p < 0.001), non-Hispanic White (90.5% vs. 77.7% vs. 76.3%) and single women (17.9% vs. 12.1% vs. 13.3%). MTX-RT was usually performed in patients with high histological grade, TNBC, and higher stages. Overall complication rates were higher in the MTX-RT, compared to OPS + RT and PM + RT, 2%, 1.1%, and 0.7%, respectively, p < 0.001. Rates of hematoma and surgical site infections were higher in the MTX-RT group. With a median follow-up of 46 months, OPS + RT had better BCSS rates at 5 years compared to PM + RT and MTX-RT (97.1% vs. 94.7% vs. 89.8%, p < 0.001). MTX-RT was found to be an independent prognostic factor of worse BCSS compared to OPS + RT (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.584; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.005-7.171), while PM + RT had no difference compared to OPS + RT (HR = 1.670, 95% CI: 0.624-4.469).

CONCLUSIONS

OPS is a safe breast surgical option in patients with HER2+ and TNBC. Patients with high-risk phenotypes who underwent OPS + RT and have similar BCSS and complication rates compared to standard breast surgical options. As such, OPS should be considered as an option whenever breast conservation surgery is being discussed.

The impact of body mass index on oncoplastic breast surgery: A multicenter analysis

BACKGROUND

Obesity has nearly tripled in the last 50 years. During the last decades, oncoplastic breast surgery has become an important choice in the surgical treatment of breast cancer. An association exists between higher body mass index (BMI) and wound complications for major operations, but there is scarce literature on oncoplastic surgery. Hence, our aim was to compare the complication rates among patients who underwent oncoplastic surgery, stratified by BMI.

METHODS

Patient data were analyzed from the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program database (NSQIP) for oncoplastic breast procedures (2005-2020). Patients were stratified according to World Health Organization obesity classifications. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to assess risk factors for complications (overall, operative, and wound-related).

RESULTS

From a total of 6887 patients who underwent oncoplastic surgery, 4229 patients were nonobese, 1380 had Class 1 obesity (BMI: 30 to <35 kg/m2 ), 737 Class 2 obesity (BMI: 35 to <40 kg/m2 ), and 541 Class 3 obesity (BMI: ≥ 40 kg/m2 ). Greater operative time was found according to higher BMI (p < 0.001). Multivariate analysis adjusted for baseline characteristics showed that patients with obesity Class 2 (odds ratio [OR] = 1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03-2.23, p = 0.037) and 3 (OR = 1.87, 95% CI 1.24-2.83, p = 0.003) had increased risk of overall and wound complications compared with Nonobese patients. Comparing obese with nonobese patients, there were no differences in rates of deep SSI, organ/space SSI, pneumonia, reintubation, pulmonary embolism, deep vein thrombosis, urinary tract infection, stroke, bleeding, postoperative sepsis, length of stay, and readmission.

CONCLUSIONS

Oncoplastic surgery is a safe procedure for most patients. However, caution should be exercised when performing oncoplastic surgery for patients with Class 2 or 3 obesity (BMI ≥ 35 kg/m2 ), given there was a higher rate of overall and wound-specific complications, compared with patients who were not obese or had Class 1 obesity.

Examining a decade of racial disparity in partial mastectomy and oncoplastic surgery

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Understanding racial disparity is crucial to addressing health equity and access to care. Our study aims to examine racial differences in breast conserving surgery (BCS) utilization rates and determine how these rates have changed over time.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort analysis utilized the NSQIP database to identify women diagnosed with breast cancer who underwent BCS procedures between 2008 and 2019. Racial utilization trends were analyzed using a Cochran-Armitage test and Index of Disparity analysis.

RESULTS

In the 12-year period, 202 492 women underwent a breast cancer surgery, of which 47% underwent BCS. Within the BCS subgroup, oncoplastic surgery utilization increased from 3% to 10%, leading to a declining proportion of partial mastectomies: 97% to 90.0% (both p < 0.01). The racial index of disparity for overall BCS patients decreased from 7% to 6%, remained unchanged (1%) for partial mastectomies, and significantly decreased in oncoplastics (23%-7.6%).

CONCLUSION

BCS represents a mainstay option for early-staged breast cancer interventions, this study demonstrate promising progress in decreasing the index of disparity among races and persistent racial inequalities.

Comparing oncoplastic breast reduction with immediate symmetry surgery to standard breast reduction surgery: Are postoperative complications worse?

INTRODUCTION

Oncoplastic breast reduction mammoplasty (ORM) is an excellent treatment option for women with breast cancer and macromastia undergoing breast conservation therapy. Here, we aim to better understand the risks associated with ORM compared to standard reduction mammoplasty (SRM).

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed of patients undergoing ORM or SRM from 2015 to 2021. Primary outcomes included the occurrence of major or minor postoperative complications in the two groups and delays to adjuvant therapy (>90 days) among the women undergoing ORM.

RESULTS

Women in the ORM group (n = 198) were significantly older (p < 0.001) with a higher prevalence of smoking (p < 0.001), diabetes mellitus (p < 0.01), and a Charlson comorbidity index ≥ 3 (p < 0.001) compared to women undergoing SRM (n = 177). After controlling for potential confounders, there were no significant between-group differences in the odds of developing postoperative complications (odds ratio = 0.80, 95% confidence interval: 0.36-1.69). Only 3% (n = 4) of the 150 women undergoing adjuvant radiation or chemotherapy experienced delays related to postoperative complications.

CONCLUSION

ORM has a similar safety profile as SRM, despite the older age and higher number of comorbidities often seen in patients undergoing ORM, and is a safe option for achieving contralateral symmetry at the time of partial mastectomy without delays to adjuvant therapy.

Single Center Oncoplastic Experience and Patient Satisfaction Reported via Patient Reported Outcomes

Oncoplastic breast surgery (OPS) is gaining in popularity compared with traditional breast conserving surgery due to wider resections and better satisfaction with cosmetic outcomes. This study analyzed OPS versus traditional breast conserving surgery outcomes: wound complications, reoperations for margins or fat necrosis, and ipsilateral recurrence.

Association between Paravertebral Block and Pain Score at the Time of Hospital Discharge in Oncoplastic Breast Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Using nonopioid analgesics may decrease the risk of patients chronically using opioids postoperatively. The authors evaluated the relationship between paravertebral block and pain score at the time of hospital discharge.

METHODS

The authors performed a retrospective cohort study of 89 women with American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I to III undergoing oncoplastic breast surgery with 20 to 50 percent breast tissue removal and immediate contralateral reconstruction between August of 2015 and August of 2018. The primary outcome was pain score at hospital discharge with or without paravertebral block. The secondary outcome was postoperative length of stay. Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test, t test, Fisher's exact test, univariable and multivariable regression, Kaplan-Meier analyses, and Cox regression.

RESULTS

Median pain score at hospital discharge was lower with paravertebral block [2 (interquartile range, 0 to 2) compared to 4 (interquartile range, 3 to 5); p < 0.001]. Multivariable regression revealed that pain score at the time of hospital discharge was inversely associated with paravertebral block after adjusting for age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, extent of lymph node surgery, and duration of surgery (p < 0.001). Pain score at hospital discharge was also associated with total opioid consumption during the first 24 hours after surgery (p = 0.001). Patients who received paravertebral blocks had median total 24-hour postoperative opioid consumption in morphine equivalents of 7 mg (interquartile range, 3 to 10 mg) compared with 13 mg (interquartile range, 7 to 18 mg) (p < 0.001), and median length of stay of 18 hours (interquartile range, 16 to 20 hours) compared with 22 hours (interquartile range, 21 to 27 hours) (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Paravertebral blocks are associated with decreased pain score at the time of hospital discharge.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

Improving Results in Oncoplastic Surgery

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Describe the risks, benefits, and safety profile of oncoplastic procedures for partial breast reconstruction, and how they compare to breast conservation-therapy alone. 2. Have a working knowledge of oncoplastic techniques and how they are addressed from the multidisciplinary perspective. 3. Understand the limitations of oncoplastic techniques and how to avoid unfavorable results.

SUMMARY

Oncoplastic surgical techniques have expanded indications for breast conservation and have improved both oncologic and reconstructive outcomes. This article will focus on some of the barriers to adoption and discuss ways to improve safety through streamlining the process, understanding the oncologic concerns, and evaluating unfavorable outcomes that might interfere with the appropriate delivery of breast cancer care.

A comprehensive literature review of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) among common breast reconstruction options: What types of breast reconstruction score well?

PURPOSE

Breast cancer continues to be the most prevalent cancer affecting women. Many reconstructive options exist after oncologic resection. Breast reconstruction can have a lasting impact on many areas of the patient's life, and therefore, a high consideration for patient satisfaction is crucial. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide an important tool in the evaluation of different surgical methodologies. The aim of this comprehensive systematic review is to look at various surgical modalities in breast reconstruction as they relate to patient satisfaction.

METHODS

A PubMed PRISMA search was performed. Criteria for inclusion included nipple-sparing or skin-sparing mastectomy with autologous or implant-based reconstruction, level 2 volume displacement or volume replacement oncoplastic surgery, and measurement of patient-reported outcomes using the BREAST-Q or other validated PROMs. From the data set, weighted proportions were generated and analyzed using the Kruskal-Wallis rank sum test and a post hoc Dunn's test.

RESULTS

After obtaining 254 full text copies, 43 articles met inclusion criteria and were included. Analysis of BREAST-Q data showed oncoplastic breast surgery was significantly preferred over mastectomy regardless of the type of reconstruction. Nipple-sparing was significantly preferred over skin-sparing mastectomy, autologous reconstruction was significantly preferred over implant-based reconstruction, and prepectoral implant placement was preferred over subpectoral implant placement. Validated PROMs other than BREAST-Q showed similar trends in all but type of mastectomy.

CONCLUSIONS

In this comprehensive systematic review, oncoplastic surgery showed the most favorable PROMs when compared to other reconstructive modalities. Autologous was preferred over implant-based reconstruction, and prepectoral was preferred over subpectoral implant placement.