scholarly journals Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy in Breast Cancer: Impact on Surgical Resection, Oncologic Safety, and Psychological Well-Being

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Parks, MS, APRN-CNP, ANP-BC
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Body Image ◽  
Patient Satisfaction ◽  
Well Being ◽  
Complex Data ◽  
Areola Complex ◽  
Areolar Complex ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing ◽  
Surgical Option

Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is a surgical option to improve patient satisfaction with aesthetic outcome. It can be utilized to decrease body image disturbance by preserving the woman’s skin and areolar complex. Data for cancer treatment and risk reduction in NSM shows the procedure is oncologically safe. Nipple-sparing mastectomy preserves the nipple to improve cosmetic appearance. Patient satisfaction is higher for NSM compared with traditional mastectomy. PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched from January 1, 2013, to December 22, 2019. The following search terms and keywords were used: nipple-sparing mastectomy, microvascular breast reconstruction, breast cancer, and nipple necrosis. Studies published in scientific journals that reported objective results (specific outcomes of skin flap and nipple-areola complex necrosis) were included. Nipple-sparing mastectomy should be discussed as a surgical option for women who meet the selection criteria to assist with psychological benefits related to body image. Research comparing levels of distress and body image disturbances in women undergoing NSM with traditional mastectomy would be helpful in addressing the psychological care of these women. Ongoing data collection needs to continue to validate that NSM is safe from a surgical and an oncologic standpoint.

scholarly journals Robot-assisted Nipple-sparing Mastectomy with Immediate Breast Reconstruction: An Initial Experience

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hyung Seok Park ◽  
Jeea Lee ◽  
Dong Won Lee ◽  
Seung Yong Song ◽  
Dae Hyun Lew ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Learning Curve ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Immediate Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Open Conversion ◽  
Areolar Complex ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing

Abstract Seeking smaller and indistinct incisions, physicians have attempted endoscopic breast surgery in breast cancer patients. Unfortunately, there are some limitations in the range of movement and visualization of the operation field. Potentially addressing these limitations, we investigated the outcomes of gas and gasless robot-assisted nipple-sparing mastectomy (RANSM) with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). Ten patients underwent 12 RANSM with IBR between November 2016 and April 2018. Patients with tumors measuring >5 cm in diameter, tumor invasion of the skin or nipple-areolar complex, proven metastatic lymph nodes, or planned radiotherapy were excluded. Age, breast weight, diagnosis, tumor size, hormone receptor status, and operation time were retrospectively collected. Postoperative outcomes including postoperative complications and final margin status of resected were analyzed. The median total operation time and console time were 351 min (267–480 min) and 51 min (18–143 min), respectively. The learning curve presented as a cumulative sum graph showed that the console time decreased and then stabilized at the eighth case. There was no open conversion or major postoperative complication. One patient had self-resolved partial nipple ischemia, and two patients experienced partial skin ischemia. We deemed that RANSM with IBR is safe and feasible for early breast cancer, benign disease of the breast, and BRCA 1/2 mutation carriers. RANSM is an advanced surgical method with a short learning curve.

scholarly journals Clinical outcomes of patients after nipple-sparing mastectomy and reconstruction based on the expander/implant technique

Surgery Today ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Uhi Toh ◽  
Miki Takenaka ◽  
Nobutaka Iwakuma ◽  
Yoshito Akagi
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Breast Reconstruction ◽  
Gene Mutations ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Areolar Complex ◽  
Cost Effective Method ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing ◽  
Breast Reconstructive Surgery

AbstractAdvances in multi-modality treatments incorporating systemic chemotherapy, endocrine therapy, and radiotherapy for the management of breast cancer have resulted in a surgical-management paradigm change toward less-aggressive surgery that combines the use of breast-conserving or -reconstruction therapy as a new standard of care with a higher emphasis on cosmesis. The implementation of skin-sparing and nipple-sparing mastectomies (SSM, NSM) has been shown to be oncologically safe, and breast reconstructive surgery is being performed increasingly for patients with breast cancer. NSM and breast reconstruction can also be performed as prophylactic or risk-reduction surgery for women with BRCA gene mutations. Compared with conventional breast construction followed by total mastectomy (TM), NSM preserving the nipple–areolar complex (NAC) with breast reconstruction provides psychosocial and aesthetic benefits, thereby improving patients’ cosmetic appearance and body image. Implant-based breast reconstruction (IBBR) has been used worldwide following mastectomy as a safe and cost-effective method of breast reconstruction. We review the clinical evidence about immediate (one-stage) and delayed (two-stage) IBBR after NSM. Our results suggest that the postoperative complication rate may be higher after NSM followed by IBBR than after TM or SSM followed by IBBR.

Experience with nipple-sparing mastectomy after prior whole-breast radiation.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 173-173
Author(s):  
Aimee Marlena Mackey ◽  
Bret Taback ◽  
Preya Ananthakrishnan ◽  
Sheldon M. Feldman
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Brca Mutation ◽  
Breast Cancers ◽  
Ipsilateral Breast ◽  
Immediate Reconstruction ◽  
Areola Complex ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing ◽  
Good Cosmesis

173 Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) is being performed more frequently for risk reduction and breast cancer treatment. Prior whole breast irradiation (WBI) has been considered a contraindication to NSM. This study reviews our NSM experience following prior WBI. Methods: We reviewed our prospective mastectomy database from April 2007 to April 2012 for patients undergoing NSM. Ten patients out of a total 169 NSM were identified that underwent NSM following prior WBI. Data collected included incision type, follow-up, complications, cosmesis, and recurrence. Results: Of the ten NSM patients who received prior WBI, 6 had recurrent ipsilateral breast cancer at the lumpectomy site, 3 developed contralateral breast cancers and opted for bilateral NSM, and 1 patient opted for bilateral NSM after finding a BRCA mutation following BCT. Mean patient age was 53. Two patients had comorbities: 1 hyperlipidemia and 1 former smoker. Three of 10 (30%) developed complications, with 2 partial necrosis of nipple-areola complex (NAC) and 1 complete loss of the NAC (Table). No patient required return to the operating room (local resection in the office was performed for the complete NAC loss) and all patients had good final cosmesis. All patients underwent immediate reconstruction: 5 tissue expanders (TE), 2 DIEP and 3 TRAM flaps. Mean follow up is 23 months with no local recurrences to date. Conclusions: This study demonstrates that NSM with immediate reconstruction can be performed in selected patients with prior WBI with an acceptable rate of nipple preservation and good cosmesis. NAC preservation is the ultimate goal in patients undergoing NSM. Current studies are ongoing to identify risk factors that may be associated with nipple necrosis. [Table: see text]

Comparison of terminal duct lobular units in the nipple areolar complex by tumor subtypes-the implication for nipple sparing mastectomy.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12082-e12082
Author(s):  
Kenna Schnarr ◽  
Fang Fan ◽  
Amanda Leigh Amin ◽  
Christa Balanoff ◽  
Joshua Mammen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Breast Cancer Subtype ◽  
Tumor Subtype ◽  
Luminal B ◽  
Nipple Areolar Complex ◽  
Areolar Complex ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing

e12082 Background: Nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) has gained popularity for surgical treatment of breast cancer. Terminal duct lobular units (TDLU) have been shown to be present in 25% of nipple areolar complex (NAC). Pathologic tumor subtype influence on presence of TDLU in the NAC has not been assessed. In addition, criteria for technically performing the dissection below the NAC have not been established. We sought to evaluate TDLU characteristics by tumor subtype and determine NSM dissection criteria below the NAC. Methods: A retrospective review was performed of 120 total and skin sparing mastectomies, 30 of each breast cancer subtype, from 1/2013 to 1/2015. The NAC of each mastectomy was assessed for number of TDLU and distance from TDLU to the skin. Results: Thirty of the 120 mastectomies (25%) had TDLU present below the NAC. Of the 30 with TDLU, there was no statistically significant difference in number of TDLU present based on tumor grade (gd) (gd 1 vs 2, p = .67; gd 1 vs 3, p = .24). Compared to luminal A, luminal B showed statistical significance (p < .05) for number of TDLU at the NAC whereas Her 2 and triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) were not statistically significant (p = .09 and .10). In mastectomies with TDLU present, gd 2 (p < .05) and gd 3 (p = .05) had a closer skin distance than gd 1. When compared by tumor subtype, there was no difference in TDLU to skin distance (table). Conclusions: NSM has been adopted as a safe oncologic approach to breast cancer treatment. Although presence of TDLU in luminal B subtype was statistically significant, this may not be clinically significant, as there were only 2 of 30 cases with TDLU. Our study indicates that a careful dissection at the level of the dermis below the NAC is necessary, as 25% of women will have TDLU present. This will provide an appropriate oncologic outcome similar to total and skin sparing mastectomy. Tumor subtype does not appear to be exclusion criteria for NSM. However, more aggressive dissection may be necessary to clear all TDLU from below the NAC in higher gd cancers. [Table: see text]

A novel nipple–areola complex involvement predictive index for indicating nipple-sparing mastectomy in breast cancer patients

Breast Cancer ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 26 (6) ◽  
pp. 808-816 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hirohito Seki ◽  
Takashi Sakurai ◽  
Shodai Mizuno ◽  
Toshiki Tokuda ◽  
Takuji Kaburagi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Predictive Index ◽  
Nipple Areola Complex ◽  
Areola Complex ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing

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

Medicina ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 56 (4) ◽  
pp. 166
Author(s):  
Alessio Metere ◽  
Elisabetta Fabiani ◽  
Maria Teresa Lonardo ◽  
Domenico Giannotti ◽  
Daniela Pace ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Late Complications ◽  
Breast Cancer Surgery ◽  
Safe Procedure ◽  
Long Term Outcomes ◽  
Areola Complex ◽  
Nipple Sparing Mastectomy ◽  
Nipple Sparing

Background and Objectives: The surgical choice treatment of the breast cancer mostly depends on the stage of the disease. In the last years, breast cancer surgery has moved from being destructive to being more respectful of the anatomical and physiological integrity of the gland. The aim of the breast surgery should be finalized to obtain the best aesthetic and functional results, respecting the principles of oncologic radicality. The present study is a retrospective analysis aimed to evaluate the long-term outcomes of a conservative technique like the nipple-sparing mastectomy. Materials and Methods: We observed 894 patients with a median age of 47.5 years old, underwent nipple-sparing mastectomy between 2002–2017. The data acquired include population and tumor characteristics, patient reconstructive outcomes, including locoregional, regional, and distant metastases; other variables, among nipple–areola complex necrosis and infection were collected. Results: The complications detected were considered as “early” within 1 month later the nipple-sparing mastectomy or “late” after this time. The overall complications rate (early and late) and the overall survival and the relapses detected by this study were comparable with those reported in the literature. In order to identify factors that correlate with complications, either early or later, it has been processed an evaluation of the univariate analysis showing adjuvant chemotherapy as the only predictive factor for late complications, while we encountered no predictors for early complications. Conclusions: The present study adds to the data already present in literature, demonstrating that the nipple-sparing mastectomy is a safe procedure, providing good oncological and aesthetic results in patients carefully selected.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document