Oncologic safety of nipple‐sparing mastectomy in patients with short tumor‐nipple distance

Spare the Nipple: A Systematic Review of Tumor Nipple-Distance and Oncologic Outcomes in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Preserving the nipple-areolar complex (NAC) in breast cancer surgery improves patient satisfaction and quality of life. The oncologic safety of NSM in tumors < 2 cm from the nipple remains in question. We conducted a systematic review to determine whether TND < 2 cm was associated with increased risk of LRR in patients undergoing NSM.

METHODS

We included studies of invasive or in situ breast cancer < 2 cm from NAC undergoing NSM which reported LRR rates. LRR rates were stratified by TND and culminated across studies. Cohort study quality was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Criteria. Meta-analysis was not possible due to heterogeneity in reporting survival outcomes.

RESULTS

We identified seven retrospective cohort studies with 2295 patients and 18 case series with 3507 patients. Direct tumor involvement of NAC was considered an absolute contraindication to NSM in all studies. In cohort studies, median follow-up was 31-112 (range 14-204) months. Cohorts with TND < 2 cm did not have a significantly higher rate of LRR. Amongst case series, 275 patients had TND < 2 cm. Combined LRR in case series was 2.6%, with median follow-up 10.4-71 (range 0-158) months.

CONCLUSIONS

Our systematic review did not identify TND < 2 cm as a significant risk factor for LRR. NSM appears oncologically safe in select patients with TND < 2 cm. Given the improved quality of life associated with NSM compared to skin-sparing mastectomy, we suggest NSM as the procedure of choice in appropriately selected patients.

Long-Term Outcomes of Breast Cancer Patients with Local Recurrence After Mastectomy Undergoing Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Retrospective Multi-institutional Study of 4153 Cases

BACKGROUND

The number of breast cancer patients in Japan undergoing immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has increased and the postoperative follow-up period has been extended. This study was conducted to clarify the clinical aspects of, and factors associated with, local recurrence (LR) after IBR.

METHODS

This was a multicenter study which included 4153 early breast cancer patients who underwent IBR. Clinicopathological characteristics were examined and factors potentially contributing to LR were analyzed. Risk factors for LR were examined separately for non-invasive and invasive breast cancers.

RESULTS

The median follow-up period was 75 months. The 7-year LR rates were 2.1% and 4.3% for non-invasive and invasive cancers, respectively (p < 0.001). The proportions of LR detected by palpation, subjective symptoms, and ultrasonography were 40.0%, 27.3%, and 25.9%, respectively. Overall, 75.7% of LR were solitary, and 92.7% of these cases had no further recurrences during the observational period. Multivariate analysis of LR for invasive cancer showed that skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) or nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), the presence of lymphovascular invasion, cancer at the surgical margin, and not receiving radiation therapy were factors related to LR. The 7-year overall survival rates of the patients with LR and non-LR of invasive cancers were 92.5% and 97.3%, respectively, (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of LR after IBR was acceptably low and IBR can thus be performed safely for early breast cancer patients. Invasive cancer, SSM/NSM, lymphovascular invasion, and/or cancer at the surgical margin should prompt awareness of the possibility of LR.

Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging: An Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) Clinical Practice Guideline

BACKGROUND

The use of preoperative breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) after the diagnosis of breast cancer by mammography and/or ultrasound is inconsistent.

METHODS

After conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis comparing preoperative breast MRI versus no MRI, we reconvened to prepare a clinical practice guideline on this topic.

RESULTS

Based on the evidence that MRI improved recurrence, decreased the rates of reoperations (re-excisions or conversion mastectomy), and increased detection of synchronous contralateral breast cancer, we recommend that preoperative breast MRI should be considered on a case-by-case basis in patients diagnosed with breast cancer for whom additional information about disease extent could influence treatment. Based on stronger evidence, preoperative breast MRI is recommended in patients diagnosed with invasive lobular carcinoma for whom additional information about disease extent could influence treatment. For both recommendations, the decision to proceed with MRI would be conditional on shared decision-making between care providers and the patient, taking into account the benefits and risks of MRI as well as patient preferences. Based on the opinion of the Working Group, preoperative breast MRI is also recommended in the following more specific situations: (a) to aid in surgical planning of breast conserving surgery in patients with suspected or known multicentric or multifocal disease; (b) to identify additional lesions in patients with dense breasts; (c) to determine the presence of pectoralis major muscle/chest wall invasion in patients with posteriorly located tumours or when invasion of the pectoralis major muscle or chest wall is suspected; (d) to aid in surgical planning for skin/nipple-sparing mastectomies, autologous reconstruction, oncoplastic surgery, and breast conserving surgery with suspected nipple/areolar involvement; and (e) in patients with familial/hereditary breast cancer but who have not had recent breast MRI as part of screening or diagnosis.

Oncological Outcomes of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in an Unselected Population Evaluated in a Single Center

OBJECTIVE

 Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has been traditionally used in selected cases with tumor-to-nipple distance > 2 cm and negative frozen section of the base of the nipple. Recommending NSM in unselected populations remains controversial. The present study evaluated the oncological outcomes of patients submitted to NSM in an unselected population seen at a single center.

METHODS

 This retrospective cohort study included unselected patients with invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who underwent NSM in 2010 to 2020. The endpoints were locoregional recurrence, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS), irrespective of tumor size or tumor-to-nipple distance.

RESULTS

 Seventy-six patients (mean age 46.1 years) (58 invasive carcinomas/18 DCIS) were included. The most invasive carcinomas were hormone-positive (60%) (HER2 overexpression: 24%; triple-negative: 16%), while 39% of DCIS were high-grade. Invasive carcinomas were T2 in 66% of cases, with axillary metastases in 38%. Surgical margins were all negative. All patients with invasive carcinoma received systemic treatment and 38% underwent radiotherapy. After a mean of 34.8 months, 3 patients with invasive carcinoma (5.1%) and 1 with DCIS (5.5%) had local recurrence. Two patients had distant metastasis and died during follow-up. The 5-year OS and DFS rates for invasive carcinoma were 98% and 83%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

 In unselected cases, the 5-year oncological outcomes following NSM were found to be acceptable and comparable to previous reports. Further studies are required.

Implant-Based Breast Reconstruction after Mastectomy, from the Subpectoral to the Prepectoral Approach: An Evidence-Based Change of Mind?

Over the last years, prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction has undergone a renaissance due to several technical advancements regarding mastectomy techniques and surgical approaches for the placement and soft tissue coverage of silicone implants. Initially abandoned due to the high incidence of complications, such as capsular contraction, implant extrusion, and poor aesthetic outcome, the effective prevention of these types of complications led to the prepectoral technique coming back in style for the ease of implant placement and the conservation of the pectoralis muscle function. Additional advantages such as a decrease of postoperative pain, animation deformity, and operative time contribute to the steady gain in popularity. This review aims to summarize the factors influencing the trend towards prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction and to discuss the challenges and prospects related to this operative approach.

BRCA2-associated Breast Cancer in Transgender Women: Reconstructive Challenges and Literature Review

Breast cancer in trans women is rare. Only 21 cases have been reported worldwide. Multidisciplinary teams must balance oncologic treatment with patient goals. Here we describe a case of invasive ductal carcinoma in a transgender woman who was found to have a BRCA2 gene mutation. A shared decision-making process led to the patient undergoing bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy with immediate tissue expander placement. Later findings prompted discussions about adjuvant chemotherapy and radiation. Additionally, we discuss the complexities associated with reconstructing a transfeminine chest.

Subareolar Tissue Biopsy Predicts Occult Nipple Involvement in Nipple-Sparing Mastectomies

OBJECTIVES

Subareolar tissue is examined during nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) to minimize the risk of occult malignancy within the preserved nipple. A positive subareolar tissue biopsy typically warrants subsequent nipple excision. We study the factors associated with a positive subareolar tissue biopsy, the rate of residual malignancy in subsequent nipple excisions, and the value of subareolar tissue biopsy intraoperative frozen section (IOF).

METHODS

We identified 1,026 consecutive NSMs with separately submitted subareolar tissue biopsies over a 5.5-year period. Clinicopathologic data were reviewed. We examined concordance rates between subareolar tissue biopsy and subsequent nipple excisions as well as IOF diagnosis and permanent control diagnosis.

RESULTS

Among cases of therapeutic NSM, the rate of a positive subareolar tissue biopsy was 7.2%. Multifocal/multicentric disease (P = .0005), presence of lymphovascular invasion (P = .033), and nodal involvement (P = .006) were significantly associated with a positive subareolar tissue biopsy. Thirty-nine of 41 cases with positive subareolar biopsies underwent subsequent nipple excision, with 20 (51%) showing residual carcinoma. Among all IOF samples, 9 (3.3%) showed a discrepancy between the IOF and permanent diagnoses, mostly because of false-negatives.

CONCLUSIONS

A positive subareolar tissue biopsy predicts residual carcinoma in the excised nipples in 51% of cases. IOF is accurate and reliable.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Nonmass Enhancement at Breast MRI in Predicting Tumor Involvement of the Nipple: A Prospective Study in a Single Institution

Background Although nonmass enhancement (NME) extension to the nipple at preoperative MRI frequently leads to sacrifice of the nipple-areolar complex (NAC), its correlation with pathologically confirmed NAC involvement is unclear. Purpose To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of using NME extension to the subareolar region at breast MRI to predict pathologic nipple involvement and the eligibility for nipple-sparing mastectomy. Materials and Methods From November 2017 to November 2019, the authors prospectively enrolled participants with breast cancer and NME within 2 cm of the nipple at breast MRI who underwent surgery that included removal of the NAC. The authors evaluated NME extensions that were ipsilateral and contiguous with the biopsy-proven tumor lesions on images acquired during the early contrast phases. Pathologic nipple involvement and the distance from the nipple to the nearest cancer cell were evaluated by using serial vertical sectioning of the area extending from the entire NAC to the tumor. The primary end point was the positive predictive value (PPV) of NME, which was calculated as follows: (number with pathologic nipple invasion and NME extension to the nipple at breast MRI/number with NME extension to the nipple at breast MRI) × 100. Results Of 64 women (mean age, 52 years ± 9.8 [standard deviation]), 49 (77%) had NME extension to the nipple at breast MRI. The PPV of NME extension to the nipple was 86% (42 of 49 women; 95% CI: 73, 94). Among the 15 participants without NME extension to the nipple, only one (7%) had pathologic nipple involvement. The diagnostic accuracy of using NME extension to the nipple was 88% (56 of 64 women; 95% CI: 77, 95). The radiologic distance correlated well with the pathologic distance (Spearman correlation coefficient = 0.71, P = .003). Conclusion Nonmass enhancement extension to the nipple base at preoperative MRI has a high positive predictive value for identifying tumor involvement of the nipple, a contraindication to nipple-sparing mastectomy. © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article.

Oncological safety of therapeutic 'nipple-sparing mastectomy' followed by reconstruction: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer (BC) treatment traditionally consisted of radical and often mutilating surgery. Advances in the field of BC have led to new remedies, enabling the paradigm shift from radical to conservative surgery. New treatments such as nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) are becoming more popular, aiming to improve both oncological and aesthetic outcomes. However, evidence confirming the oncological safety of NSM is currently lacking, hindering its application. This systematic review sought to analyze NSM's oncological safety as an alternative to conventional mastectomy (CM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A systematic review was performed, respecting the PRISMA guidelines. Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science databases were consulted and searched for keywords: 'nipple-sparing mastectomy' and 'mammaplasty', or combinations of synonyms. Only original studies published between 2000 and 2020 reporting tumor recurrence and/or survival rates with a minimum of 5-year follow-up were included.

RESULTS

From the 1675 unique records found, 14 studies were included, amounting to 5980 female BC patients who underwent NSM plus reconstruction. Included studies described either only ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS, n = 1), only invasive BC (n = 3) or DCIS and invasive BC (n = 10). The most recurrent oncological metrics were 5-year local recurrence (0-10%), locoregional recurrence (0-7.4%), distant recurrence (1.6-15.6%), and overall survival rate (93.1-100%).

CONCLUSION

Based on long-term low BC recurrences and high survival rates, NSM is perceived to be non-inferior to CM from an oncological perspective. This identifies NSM plus reconstruction to be a safe curative treatment. Further studies should aim to elicit clear and applicable selection criteria in order to maximize NSM's potential.

Pattern of local recurrence after mastectomy and reconstruction in breast cancer patients: a systematic review

Background

This study aimed to describe the locations of local recurrences based on the mastectomy and reconstruction type in breast cancer patients.

Methods

In November 2020, a systematic literature review was performed through MEDLINE/PubMed and the Cochrane Centre Register of Controlled Trials. Publications that included skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy followed by breast reconstruction and described the location of local recurrences were analyzed. Exclusion criteria included salvage or prophylactic mastectomy, unclear distinction between local and regional recurrences, rare tumor types.

Results

From 19 publications, 272 local recurrences lesions were reported in a total of 4,787 patients. After autologous reconstruction (n=2,465), local recurrences were located in the skin in 45 (1.8%) patients, in the chest wall in 18 (0.7%), and in the nipple-areolar complex in 9 (0.4%). After implant reconstruction (n=1,917), local recurrences sites included the skin in 91 (4.7%) patients, chest wall in 8 (0.4%), and nipple-areolar complex in 8 (0.4%). Of the 70 lesions with reported in-breast location, 57 (81.4%) relapsed in the original tumor location.

Discussion

Although meta-analysis was not conducted, present analysis demonstrated that most local recurrences after skin-sparing or nipple-sparing mastectomy occurred within the skin or subcutaneous tissues. It was found that the original tumor location was the most frequent site of relapse. Therefore, special attention should be paid to the original tumor overlying the skin while planning postmastectomy radiation therapy.

Oncologic Safety of Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Patients with Breast Cancer and Tumor-to-Nipple Distance ≤ 1 cm: A Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

A short tumor-to-nipple distance (TND) is reported as a strong predictor of nipple-areola complex (NAC) involvement. Eligibility for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) remains controversial, especially regarding TND. In this study, we compared long-term oncologic outcomes after NSM between patients with a TND ≤ 1 cm and those with a TND > 1 cm.

METHODS

Overall, 1369 patients with primary breast cancer who underwent NSM with immediate reconstruction from March 2003 to December 2015 were included for analysis. After propensity score matching, 495 patients with a TND ≤ 1 cm (group A) and 495 patients with a TND > 1 cm (group B) on imaging were selected to compare long-term oncologic outcomes.

RESULTS

After matching, the median follow-up periods for surviving patients were 109 months and 112 months for groups A and B, respectively. There were no significant differences between groups with respect to the 5-year cumulative local recurrence (8.1% vs. 6.3%; p = 0.268), NAC recurrence (5.1% vs. 2.8%; p = 0.072), regional recurrence (2.0% vs. 3.6%; p = 0.125), or distant recurrence (5.9% vs. 4.8%; p = 0.480) rates. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed between the groups with respect to the 10-year local recurrence-free survival (87.1% vs. 90.7%; p = 0.164) or disease-free survival (77.9% vs. 81.6%; p = 0.222) rates.

CONCLUSIONS

A preoperative TND ≤ 1 cm on imaging should not be contraindicated to NSM as long as there is no involvement of NAC clinically or on imaging and if retroareolar margins are confirmed to be negative for tumor cells.

Comparison of complications according to incision types in nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction

Background

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM), followed by immediate reconstruction (IR) of the breast, has become a preferred surgical procedure with good cosmesis results and patient satisfaction. However, nipple-areolar complex (NAC) ischemia and necrosis remain major problems after NSM and IR.

Methods

We retrospectively analyzed patients who underwent NSM and IR at Gangnam Severance Hospital from January 2009 to June 2018. We compared the patient characteristics and complication rate among three different incisions (inframammary fold [IMF], radial, periareolar). Additionally, we identified the risk factors of NAC necrosis.

Results

Data from 290 eligible breasts in 275 patients were analyzed. Patients with IMF incision had relatively lower breast weights. The overall complication rate was the highest with periareolar incision and the lowest with IMF incision (42.6% vs. 18.8%, p < 0.001). The rate of NAC ischemia or necrosis was significantly different among the three incisions (9.7%, 17.0%, and 31.1% in IMF, radial, and periareolar, respectively; p < 0.001). Moreover, surgical treatments were more frequently needed in patients with periareolar incision. Periareolar incision, short distance from the tumor to the nipple base, and large breast weight were independent risk factors of NAC ischemia or necrosis in multivariable analysis.

Conclusions

Compared with IMF incision, periareolar incision was associated with higher incidences of surgical complications and NAC necrosis. Careful consideration is needed when planning NSM in patients with a large breast volume or a tumor close to the nipple.

•

Periareolar incision shows higher complication rate in nipple-sparing mastectomy.

•

Periareolar incision is a risk factor for nipple-areolar complex necrosis.

•

Other risk factors include tumor-nipple distance and breast weight.

Significance of Non-Mass Enhancement in the Subareolar Region on Preoperative Breast Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy

PURPOSE

The eligibility for nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) regarding subareolar non-mass enhancement (NME) on breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the eligibility for NSM according to the NME-to-nipple distance on preoperative breast MRI.

METHODS

We identified patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy with NME suspected of malignancy in the subareolar region on preoperative breast MRI. The incidence of nipple invasion was pathologically evaluated according to the NME-to-nipple distance on breast MRI, and the clinicopathologic factors related to pathologic nipple invasion were analyzed.

RESULTS

Of 137 patients, 55 (40.1%) had NME extension to the nipple, 53 (38.7%) had radiologic distance less than 2 cm, and 29 (21.2%) had radiologic distance of 2 cm or more. The rate of pathologic nipple invasion was 52.7% (29 of 55) in patients with NME extension to nipple, 7.5% (4 of 53) in patients with NME-to-nipple distance less than 2 cm, and 3.4% (1 of 29) in patients with NME-to-nipple distance of 2 cm or more (P < .001). NME extension to the nipple was an independent risk factor for pathologic nipple invasion (odds ratio 21.702; 95% confidence interval, 2.613-180.225; P = .004). The survival outcome was not different between NSM and conventional total mastectomy/skin-sparing mastectomy in patients with radiologic distance less than 2 cm, but without NME extension to the nipple.

CONCLUSIONS

NSM is an acceptable procedure in patients with breast cancer with a low incidence of pathologic nipple invasion when there is no evidence of NME extension to the nipple on preoperative breast MRI.

Evidence-based nipple-sparing mastectomy in patients with higher body mass index: Recommendations for a successful standardized surgery

Nipple-sparing mastectomy is used with increasing frequency in the multidisciplinary treatment of patients with operable breast cancer. This technique allows to remove the entire glandular tissue preserving the skin envelope and the nipple-areola complex. Common indications to nipple-sparing mastectomy include extensive or multicentric disease, inability to obtain clear surgical margins with breast conserving-surgery, large tumor size with respect to the breast size, as well as cases with contraindications for radiotherapy as well as patient preference. Higher body mass index may cause longer operative times and increased risk of complications such as nipple-areola complex and skin flap ischemia. Repetitive performance of standardized tasks could optimize oncological and aesthetic outcomes and increase the chance of success.

Implant Reconstruction in Nipple Sparing Mastectomy

Nipple sparing mastectomy has been popularized in the modern era of breast cancer treatment due to its touted advantages with regard to resultant body image and reconstructive outcome. Implant-based techniques remain the most prevalent means of breast reconstruction. Special considerations regarding patient selection and technique are reviewed for implant reconstruction in the setting of mastectomy with nipple preservation. Applications for prepectoral and direct-to-implant reconstruction are discussed and published outcomes are summarized.