Immediate Implant-based Breast Reconstruction with Acellular Dermal Matrix Compared with Tissue-expander Breast Reconstruction: Rate of Infection

Background:. The risk of infection continues to be a subject of discussion within the field of implant-based breast reconstruction. Studies have shown the feasibility of immediate single-stage procedures with acellular dermal matrix (ADM), yet 2-stage tissue expander techniques continue to be the procedure most often performed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate postoperative infections and to identify associated predictors. Methods:. A retrospective study at Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital was conducted between 2013 and 2017. Patients’ demographic data were compared between single-stage and 2-stage procedures. Rate of infection and predictors were examined. Minor infections could be treated by oral antibiotics only, major infections required inpatient treatment. Healing was considered a successful treatment with antibiotics only, whereas any supplementary surgical intervention resulting in the preservation of an implant device was considered salvage. Breast reconstruction was defined a failure in case of implant loss or need for autologous reconstruction. Results:. Three hundred ninety-three patients underwent 336 monolateral and 57 bilateral implant-based breast reconstruction. Ninety-two patients had a submuscular direct-to-implant reconstruction with ADM with an infection rate of 11.4% compared with an infection rate of 7.8% among the 268 patients with a 2-stage tissue expander procedure. Beta-binomial regression showed obesity and preoperative radiotherapy as significant predictors for infection (OR, 4.65, P = 0.038, and OR, 7.13, P = 0.015, respectively). Average time of onset of infection among the submuscular direct-to-implant with ADM group was 67.1 days compared with 80.1 days among tissue-expander group with postoperative chemotherapy and preoperative radiotherapy having a significant effect on time of infection onset (P = 0.014, P = 0.034, respectively). Conclusions:. Direct-to-implant breast reconstruction with ADM is a procedure with acceptable risks of infection in comparison to tissue expander procedures. A profound patient selection pre- and intraoperatively is the basis of successful breast reconstruction

Elaboration of a nomogram to predict nonsentinel node status in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel node, intraoperatively assessed with one step nucleic amplification: Retrospective and validation phase

Background: Tumor-positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy results in a risk of non sentinel node metastases in micro-and macro-metastases ranging from 20 to 50%, respectively. Therefore, most patients underwent unnecessary axillary lymph node dissections. We have previously developed a mathematical model for predicting patient-specific risk of non sentinel node (NSN) metastases based on 2460 patients. The study reports the results of the validation phase where a total of 1945 patients were enrolled, aimed at identifying a tool that gives the possibility to the surgeon to choose intraoperatively whether to perform or not axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).Methods: The following parameters were recorded: Clinical: hospital, age, medical record number; Bio pathological: Tumor (T) size stratified in quartiles, grading (G), histologic type, lymphatic/vascular invasion (LVI), ER-PR status, Ki 67, molecular classification (Luminal A, Luminal B, HER-2 Like, Triple negative); Sentinel and non-sentinel node related: Number of NSNs removed, number of positive NSNs, cytokeratin 19 (CK19) mRNA copy number of positive sentinel nodes stratified in quartiles. A total of 1945 patients were included in the database. All patient data were provided by the authors of this paper.Results: The discrimination of the model quantified with the area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve (AUC), was 0.65 and 0.71 in the validation and retrospective phase, respectively. The calibration determines the distance between predicted outcome and actual outcome. The mean difference between predicted/observed was 2.3 and 6.3% in the retrospective and in the validation phase, respectively. The two values are quite similar and as a result we can conclude that the nomogram effectiveness was validated. Moreover, the ROC curve identified in the risk category of 31% of positive NSNs, the best compromise between false negative and positive rates i.e. when ALND is unnecessary ( 31%).Conclusions: The results of the study confirm that OSNA nomogram may help surgeons make an intraoperative decision on whether to perform ALND or not in case of positive sentinel nodes, and the patient to accept this decision based on a reliable estimation on the true percentage of NSN involvement. The use of this nomogram achieves two main gools: 1) the choice of the right treatment during the operation, 2) to avoid for the patient a second surgery procedure

International expert consensus on primary systemic therapy in the management of early breast cancer: highlights of the Fourth Symposium on Primary Systemic Therapy in the Management of Operable Breast Cancer, Cremona, Italy (2010).

A panel of international breast cancer experts formulated a declaration of consensus regarding many key issues in the use of primary systemic therapy (PST) either in clinical routine or research practice. The attainment of pathological complete response (pCR), defined as no residual invasive tumor in the surgical specimens both in breast and in axillary nodes, is one of the main goals of PST, and pCR can be used as the primary objective in prospective clinical trials. However, pCR is not a reliable endpoint with all treatment approaches, and alternatives such as Ki67 index of the residual invasive disease or after 2 weeks of PST are also potential endpoints. PST has several advantages: breast conservation and the unique opportunity to obtain information on the interaction between treatment and tumor biology. Changes in tumor biology after PST are an early phenomenon; so, an additional core biopsy performed after 14 days from treatment start should be considered in clinical trials.Consensus Development ConferenceJournal ArticleSCOPUS: ar.kinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe