Long-term follow-up of complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery, standard breast conservation and skin-sparing mastectomy in DCIS - a register-based study

BACKGROUND

Few studies evaluate oncological safety in complex oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery(C-OBCS) for DCIS. It still needs to be defined whether it is equivalent to standard breast conservation(S-BCS) or an alternative to skin-sparing mastectomy(SSM). This study compares local recurrence rates(LR), disease-free survival(DFS) and overall survival (OS) between the three surgical techniques.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective register-based study on LR, DFS and OS of patients operated with S-BCS(n=1388), C-OBCS (n=106) or skin-sparing mastectomy (n=218) for DCIS diagnosed 2007-2020. Data was extracted from the Norwegian Breast Cancer Registry.

RESULTS

In the S-BCS, C-OBCS and SSM groups, median age was 60, 58 and 51 years (p<0.001), median size 15, 25, and 40 mm (p<0.001) and median follow-up 55, 48 and 76 months. At ten years, the overall LR was 12.7%, 14.3% for S-BCS, 11.2% for C-OBCS and 6.8% for SSM. Overall DFS at ten years was 82.3%, 80.5% for S-BCS, 82.4% for C-OBCS and 90.4% for SSM. At ten years, the OS was 93.8%, 93.0% in S-BCS, 93.3% in C-OBCS and 96.6% in the SSM group. Weighted Kaplan Meier plots showed that SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS (p=0.003) and C-OBCS (p=0.029). DFS in C-OBCS versus S-BCS and the difference in OS was not significant (p=0.264).

CONCLUSION

SSM had a significantly higher DFS than S-BCS and C-OBCS. The difference in DFS between S-BCS and C-OBCS, and OS between the three groups was not statistically significant. Our study suggests that C-OBCS is a safe alternative to S-BCS and SSM.

[A six-year-old girl with dyspnea following tracheocutaneous repair]

BACKGROUND

A few patients develop prominent scars combined with persistent fistula after the removal of a long-standing tracheostomy tube. The procedure needed to correct the condition is generally considered minor surgery, normally without any significant complications. We describe, however, a patient who developed a particularly complicated postoperative course.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The patient was a six-year-old girl who underwent surgery because of significant scar formation and a persistent small tracheocutaneous fistula eight months after removal of the tube. Postoperatively she had a cough attack and developed spontaneously subcutaneous emphysema, pneumomediastinum and bilateral pneumothorax. She required intensive care, thoracic drainage and antibiotic prophylaxis. Over the next days her situation improved and she was discharged on the sixth day.

INTERPRETATION

Operative treatment of scarring after tracheostomy in which the surgeon also confronts a tracheocutaneous fistula or an opening into the tracheal lumen requires postoperative observation so that any severe complications can be managed.