| 1. |
- Arver, Brita, et al.
(författare)
-
Bilateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in Swedish Women at High Risk of Breast Cancer: A National Survey.
- 2011
-
Ingår i: Annals of surgery. - : Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 1999. - 1528-1140 .- 0003-4932. ; 253:6, s. 1147-1154
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE:: This study attempted a national inventory of all bilateral prophylactic mastectomies performed in Sweden between 1995 and 2005 in high-risk women without a previous breast malignancy. The primary aim was to investigate the breast cancer incidence after surgery. Secondary aims were to describe the preoperative risk assessment, operation techniques, complications, histopathological findings, and regional differences. METHODS:: Geneticists, oncologists and surgeons performing prophylactic breast surgery were asked to identify all women eligible for inclusion in their region. The medical records were reviewed in each region and the data were analyzed centrally. The BOADICEA risk assessment model was used to calculate the number of expected/prevented breast cancers during the follow-up period. RESULTS:: A total of 223 women operated on in 8 hospitals were identified. During a mean follow-up of 6.6 years, no primary breast cancer was observed compared with 12 expected cases. However, 1 woman succumbed 9 years post mastectomy to widespread adenocarcinoma of uncertain origin. Median age at operation was 40 years. A total of 58% were BRCA1/2 mutation carriers. All but 3 women underwent breast reconstruction, 208 with implants and 12 with autologous tissue. Four small, unifocal, invasive cancers and 4 ductal carcinoma in situ were found in the mastectomy specimens. The incidence of nonbreast related complications was low (3%). Implant loss due to infection/necrosis occurred in 21 women (10%) but a majority received a new implant later. In total, 64% of the women underwent at least 1unanticipated secondary operation. CONCLUSIONS:: Bilateral prophylactic mastectomy is safe and efficacious in reducing future breast cancer in asymptomatic women at high risk. Unanticipated reoperations are common. Given the small number of patients centralization seems justified.
|
|
| 2. |
- Isaksson, Karin, et al.
(författare)
-
Bilateral risk-reducing mastectomies with implant-based reconstructions followed long term : a consecutive series of 185 patients
- 2019
-
Ingår i: World Journal of Surgery. - : Springer Science and Business Media LLC. - 0364-2313 .- 1432-2323. ; 43:9, s. 2262-2270
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BACKGROUND: Bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy (BRRM) is the most effective method to prevent breast cancer in genetically predisposed women and is often performed concomitantly with breast reconstruction. The reconstruction time varies and corrective surgeries are common.METHODS: This study evaluated 185 consecutive cases of BRRM and immediate breast reconstruction with implants with regard to surgical outcome and resource consumption. With an 18-year observation period, it was possible to compare permanent expander implants (PEIs) with permanent fixed volume implants (PIs).RESULTS: A minimum follow-up of 2 years for all participants but one was achieved. Seventy-five percent (n = 138) of the women received PEI and 25% (n = 47) PI. In a multivariate analysis including age, BMI (<25, ≥25), smoking (yes, no), implant type (PEI, PI), incision technique, operation time and specimen weight <350 g, ≥350 g), only BMI ≥25 was associated with an increased risk of an early complication (OR 7.1, 95% CI 2.44-20.4). As expected, there was a significant difference in median reconstruction time between PEI and PI (12.4 vs. 1.0 months, p < 0.001). The cumulative reoperation-free 2-year survival was significantly higher in the PI than in the PEI group (81% vs. 26%, p < 0.001).CONCLUSION: Implant-based reconstruction remains a valid option after BRRM in high-risk women. Whenever possible (low BMI and small breast volume without severe ptosis), permanent fixed volume implants can be safely recommended and are resource saving in comparison with permanent expander implants.
|
|
