{"title":"极限肿瘤成形术推动保乳手术的极限","authors":"Berkay Kilic, Suleyman Bademler, Burak Ilhan, Ilknur Yildirim, Seden Kucucuk, Aysel Bayram, Hasan Karanlik","doi":"10.1159/000531533","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We aimed to report the long-term surgical outcomes of extreme oncoplasty techniques in selected patients with unifocal (UF)/cT3 or multifocal-multicentric tumors (MFMC).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Patients who were initially recommended to have mastectomy underwent extreme oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (eOBCS) including therapeutic reduction mammoplasty, racquet, and round-block mammoplasty, Grisotti flap, or combined technique were included. Preoperative tumor parameters, clinical outcomes, rate of local recurrence, survival, and patients' satisfaction were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-six patients with a median age of 51 years were followed for a median follow-up of 75 (8-154) months; 31 (36%) had cT3 and 55 (64%) had MFMC tumors. The majority of patients (83.6%) had invasive cancer. The median UF tumor size was 58 mm (range 51-100) on imaging and 51 mm (range 50-60) on final pathology. The median tumor span for MFMC was 65 mm (range 53-95) on imaging, whereas the median of the largest tumor size was 30 mm (range 22-60) on final pathology. Seventy-one patients (82.5%) were ER-positive, 17 (19.7%) were HER2 positive, and 8 (9.3%) were triple-negative breast cancer. Four patients (4.7%) required further intervention for having positive margins (3 re-excisions, 1 completion mastectomy). Three local recurrences (3.4%) and 10 (11.6%) distant metastasis occurred. The cosmetic outcome was excellent in 37 (43%) patients. No major complications were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>eOBCS can be a good option for patients who initially require mastectomy. Appropriate patient selection, a multidisciplinary approach, and patient consent are essential steps of the procedure.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10601621/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery with Extreme Oncoplasty.\",\"authors\":\"Berkay Kilic, Suleyman Bademler, Burak Ilhan, Ilknur Yildirim, Seden Kucucuk, Aysel Bayram, Hasan Karanlik\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000531533\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We aimed to report the long-term surgical outcomes of extreme oncoplasty techniques in selected patients with unifocal (UF)/cT3 or multifocal-multicentric tumors (MFMC).</p><p><strong>Material and methods: </strong>Patients who were initially recommended to have mastectomy underwent extreme oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (eOBCS) including therapeutic reduction mammoplasty, racquet, and round-block mammoplasty, Grisotti flap, or combined technique were included. Preoperative tumor parameters, clinical outcomes, rate of local recurrence, survival, and patients' satisfaction were assessed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eighty-six patients with a median age of 51 years were followed for a median follow-up of 75 (8-154) months; 31 (36%) had cT3 and 55 (64%) had MFMC tumors. The majority of patients (83.6%) had invasive cancer. The median UF tumor size was 58 mm (range 51-100) on imaging and 51 mm (range 50-60) on final pathology. The median tumor span for MFMC was 65 mm (range 53-95) on imaging, whereas the median of the largest tumor size was 30 mm (range 22-60) on final pathology. Seventy-one patients (82.5%) were ER-positive, 17 (19.7%) were HER2 positive, and 8 (9.3%) were triple-negative breast cancer. Four patients (4.7%) required further intervention for having positive margins (3 re-excisions, 1 completion mastectomy). Three local recurrences (3.4%) and 10 (11.6%) distant metastasis occurred. The cosmetic outcome was excellent in 37 (43%) patients. No major complications were observed.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>eOBCS can be a good option for patients who initially require mastectomy. Appropriate patient selection, a multidisciplinary approach, and patient consent are essential steps of the procedure.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":2,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10601621/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ACS Applied Bio Materials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531533\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/6/14 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000531533","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/6/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
Pushing the Limits of Breast-Conserving Surgery with Extreme Oncoplasty.
Introduction: We aimed to report the long-term surgical outcomes of extreme oncoplasty techniques in selected patients with unifocal (UF)/cT3 or multifocal-multicentric tumors (MFMC).
Material and methods: Patients who were initially recommended to have mastectomy underwent extreme oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (eOBCS) including therapeutic reduction mammoplasty, racquet, and round-block mammoplasty, Grisotti flap, or combined technique were included. Preoperative tumor parameters, clinical outcomes, rate of local recurrence, survival, and patients' satisfaction were assessed.
Results: Eighty-six patients with a median age of 51 years were followed for a median follow-up of 75 (8-154) months; 31 (36%) had cT3 and 55 (64%) had MFMC tumors. The majority of patients (83.6%) had invasive cancer. The median UF tumor size was 58 mm (range 51-100) on imaging and 51 mm (range 50-60) on final pathology. The median tumor span for MFMC was 65 mm (range 53-95) on imaging, whereas the median of the largest tumor size was 30 mm (range 22-60) on final pathology. Seventy-one patients (82.5%) were ER-positive, 17 (19.7%) were HER2 positive, and 8 (9.3%) were triple-negative breast cancer. Four patients (4.7%) required further intervention for having positive margins (3 re-excisions, 1 completion mastectomy). Three local recurrences (3.4%) and 10 (11.6%) distant metastasis occurred. The cosmetic outcome was excellent in 37 (43%) patients. No major complications were observed.
Conclusions: eOBCS can be a good option for patients who initially require mastectomy. Appropriate patient selection, a multidisciplinary approach, and patient consent are essential steps of the procedure.