Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Long-Term Outcomes: Early and Late Complications

Single-port insufflation endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy in early breast cancer: a retrospective cohort study

Background

Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in female patients. In recent years, more and more studies have focused on how to improve the appearance and the quality of life for patients. This study aimed to compare the oncologic safety, aesthetic results, and upper extremity function between single-port insufflation endoscopic nipple-sparing mastectomy (SIE-NSM) and conventional open mastectomy (C-OM) in early-stage breast cancer treatment.

Methods

In our retrospective cohort, 285 patients with stage I and II breast cancer were categorized into the SIE-NSM group (n=71) and the C-OM group (n=214). We assessed local recurrence, distant metastasis, and upper extremity function across the two groups. The BREAST-Q scale was employed to analyze differences in aesthetic results, psychosocial well-being, and sexual health. The risk of local recurrence was evaluated using multivariable binary logistic regression, while a multivariable linear regression model gauged upper extremity function and aesthetic outcomes.

Results

Local recurrence rates between the two groups were statistically similar (1/71, 1.4% for SIE-NSM vs. 2/214, 0.9% for C-OM, P=0.735), as confirmed by the multivariable binary logistic regression analysis. Neither group exhibited distant metastases. The SIE-NSM group demonstrated higher scores in satisfaction with breasts, chest wellness, psychosocial health, and sexual well-being (P<0.001). The SIE-NSM group also exhibited superior outcomes regarding chest wall/breast pain, shoulder mobility, and daily arm usage (P<0.001). No subcutaneous effusion was reported in the SIE-NSM group, whereas the C-OM group had a 10.7% incidence rate (P=0.004).

Conclusions

SIE-NSM offers comparable oncologic safety to C-OM but provides enhanced satisfaction regarding breast appearance, physical comfort, psychosocial health, sexual health, and improved upper extremity functionality. Consequently, this innovative approach is a suitable surgical alternative for treating early-stage breast cancer.

Implant selection in natural and stable direct-to-implant reconstruction with ten steps at nipple-sparing mastectomy

Direct-to-implant reconstruction is one of the breast repair techniques after mastectomy. Implant selection is critical in the short- and long-term success of direct-to-implant reconstruction after nipple-sparing mastectomy. In this study we developed a 10-step algorithm that we use before and during surgery. We aimed to obtain natural and stable breast reconstruction with this algorithm. In addition, we also aimed to evaluate which implants were selected using this algorithm and their short- and long-term outcomes. This retrospective study included 218 patients aged 27 to 60 years who underwent mastectomy and direct-to-implant reconstruction between November 2018 and December 2021. The patients were assigned into 4 groups according to amount of breast tissue removed. We developed a 10-step algorithm and these included: breast base, amount of breast tissue removed, evaluation of mastectomy skin flap, breast projection, ptosis, unilateral/bilateral reconstruction, chest wall deformity, patient's request, comorbid conditions and stabilization and arrangement of novel sulcus. The evaluation was made when the patient's photographs were taken at least 1 year after the surgery. The highest number of patients was recorded in group 3; in addition, mean age was also highest in group 3. The lowest number of patients was recorded in group 4. The body mass index showed a progressive increase from group 1 to group 4. Medium height moderate profile prosthesis was used in 81.7% while medium height moderate plus profile prosthesis was used in 18.3% of breasts included. We used larger prosthesis up to 58.1% when compared to the tissue removed in group 1 while we used smaller prosthesis by 25.6% in group 4. In the anterior view, the medial and lateral arch of the lower pole of the breast was obtained in all patients. Obvious asymmetry developed in 4 patients. In lateral and oblique views, upper and lower pole natural breast images were obtained in all patients, except for 5 patients. There was no sulcus inferior displacement in any patient. Implant extrusion did not occur in any patient. This algorithm is an easy to use and effective method to obtain a stable and natural breast image in the long-term.

A systematic review of oncological outcomes after nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer

Nipple-sparing mastectomy is an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy in select patients. Increasing evidence supports its use in the setting of breast cancer, however concerns still exist regarding oncological safety. The aim of this systematic review was to evaluate long-term oncological outcomes of patients who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer. A systematic review of the literature was performed to evaluate oncological outcomes in patients with breast cancer who underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy. Five major databases (PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science and Cochrane) were searched. The review included all original articles published in English reporting long-term oncological outcomes. 2334 studies were identified. After applying inclusion and exclusion criteria, 17 retrospective studies involving 7107 patients were included. The indication for nipple-sparing mastectomy was invasive carcinoma in 6069 patients (85.4%) and in situ disease in 1038 (14.6%). Median follow up was 48 months (range 25-94). The weighted mean rates of local recurrence and recurrence involving the nipple-areola complex were 5.4% (0.9-11.9) and 1.3% (0-4.9), respectively. The weighted mean distant failure rate was 4.8% (1.5-23.0). Therapeutic nipple-sparing mastectomy is oncologically safe in select patients with breast cancer.

Breast cancer recurrence after immediate and delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction-A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Oncological safety of different types and timings of PMBR after breast cancer remains controversial. Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes current clinical and shared decision‐making complex. This is the first systematic review and meta‐analysis to evaluate differences in oncological outcomes after immediate versus delayed postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) for autologous and implant‐based PMBR separately.

Methods

A systematic literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and Embase. The Cochrane Collaboration Handbook and Meta‐analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology checklist were followed for data abstraction. Variability in point estimates attributable to heterogeneity was assessed using I²‐statistic. (Loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates, distant metastasis rates, and overall breast cancer recurrence rates were pooled in generalized linear mixed models using random effects.

Results

Fifty‐five studies, evaluating 14,217 patients, were included. When comparing immediate versus delayed autologous PMBR, weighted average proportions were: 0.03 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.04), respectively, for local recurrences, 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) versus 0.02 (95% CI, 0.01–0.03) for regional recurrences, and 0.04 (95% CI, 0.03–0.06) versus 0.01 (95% CI, 0.00–0.03) for locoregional recurrences. No statistically significant differences in weighted average proportions for local, regional and locoregional recurrence rates were observed between immediate and delayed autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrences after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Conclusions

Delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR. This study highlights the paucity of strong evidence on breast cancer recurrence after specific types and timings of PMBR.

Lay summery

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial.

Lack of stratified risk assessment in literature makes clinical and shared decision‐making complex.

This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional recurrence rates as immediate autologous PMBR. Data did not allow comparing weighted average proportions of distant metastases and total breast cancer recurrence after autologous PMBR, and of all outcome measures after implant‐based PMBR.

Based on current evidence, oncological concerns do not seem a valid reason to withhold patients from certain reconstructive timings or techniques, and patients should equally be offered all reconstructive options they technically qualify for.

Oncologic safety of different types and timings of postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR) remains controversial. This meta‐analysis showed that delayed autologous PMBR leads to similar (loco)regional breast cancer recurrence rates compared to immediate autologous PMBR.

Prognosis Comparison Between Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy and Total Mastectomy in Breast Cancer: A Case-Control Study After Propensity Score Matching

Background

Currently, the operation rate of nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is increasing. However, the long-term prognosis of NSM is not well documented. We utilized the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database to analyze the long-term prognosis of NSM compared with total mastectomy (TM).

Methods

Population-level data of female breast cancer patients treated with NSM and TM were extracted from 1998 to 2016 from the SEER database. Propensity score matching (PSM) was performed to reduce the influence of selection bias and confounding variables in comparisons. Kaplan-Meier analysis, log-rank test, and Cox proportional hazard regression were performed.

Results

A total of 5765 patients underwent NSM, which increased from 266 in 2004–2009 to 5370 in 2010–2016. A total of 134,528 patients underwent TM, and the number of patients undergoing TM continued to decline. The overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) were similar between the NSM group and the TM group (P = 0.058 and 0.87, respectively). For OS, subgroup analysis showed that patients with age ≥ 46, White race, median household income ≥ $70,000, hormone receptor-positive, and HER2 negative had a better prognosis for treatment with NSM. There was no significant difference in BCSS between the NSM group and the TM group.

Conclusions

In recent years, the clinical application of NSM has been increasing. NSM is a proper procedure for breast cancer patients to achieve long-term survival.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1245/s10434-021-11044-4.

Male Breast Cancer: Treatment Trends, Reported Outcomes, and Suggested Recommendations

Male breast cancer (MBC) is unfamiliar to most men, and its optimal treatment options are not well recognized by many treating physicians. The lack of MBC specific clinical trials contributes to the limitations of understanding MBC specific pathology, treatment options, and outcomes. This state-of-affairs contribute to perpetuating the use of treatment methods derived from our existing knowledge of female breast cancer (FBC). Previous studies demonstrate that men are often undertreated or disproportionately treated using more invasive surgical procedures even in the early stages of MBC. The purpose of this investigation was to thoroughly discuss current MBC treatment options, provide an evidence-based summary of their outcomes, note recent improvements, discuss important considerations and recommendations. Our goal is to aid the treatment decision process for patients and treating physicians.