Lipofilling after breast conserving surgery: A comprehensive literature review investigating its oncologic safety

Lipofilling has regenerative properties used to improve deformities after breast conserving surgery. Our hypothesis is that there is inadequate data to ensure that lipofilling does not increase locoregional cancer recurrence after breast conserving surgery. A PRISMA comprehensive literature review was conducted of articles published prior to October 2019 investigating recurrence in patients who underwent lipofilling after breast conserving surgery. All forms of breast conserving surgery, fat grafting, and injection intervals were included. Patients undergoing mastectomy were excluded. Requirements to define lipofilling as safe included (I) a defined interval between resection and lipofilling; (II) a minimum follow-up period of 6 years from tumor resection; (III) a minimum follow-up period of 3 years from lipofilling; (IV) presence of a control group; (V) controls matched for ER/PR/Her-2; (VI) a sub-group analysis focusing on ER/PR/Her-2; (VII) adequate powering. Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. The range in time from breast conserving surgery to fat injection was 0-76 months. The average time to follow-up after lipofilling was 23 days-60 months. Two studies had a sufficient follow-up time from both primary resection and from lipofilling. Seventeen of the nineteen studies specified the interval between resection and lipofilling, but there is currently no consensus regarding how soon lipofilling can be performed following BCS. Eight studies performed a subgroup analysis in cases of recurrence and found recurrence after lipofilling was associated with number of positive axillary nodes, intraepithelial neoplasia, high grade histology, Luminal A subtype, age \u3c50, Ki-67 expression, and lipofilling within 3 months of primary resection. Of the eleven studies that included a comparison group, one matched patient for Her-2 and there was a statistically significant difference in Her-2 positive cancers in the study arms of two articles. Several studies deemed lipofilling safe, two showed association of lipofilling and local recurrence, and most studies concluded that further research was needed. Insufficient and contradictory data exists to demonstrate the safety of lipofilling after breast conserving surgery. A multicentered, well designed study is needed to verify the safety of this practice

Single incision for oncologic breast conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy in early stage breast cancer: A minimally invasive approach.

Introduction Breast conserving surgery (BCS) has a postoperative morbidity up to 30%. We report the feasibility of a single-incision approach for tumor excision and axillary sentinel node biopsy (SNB) sampling intended to minimize patient morbidity and complications. Materials and methods A tertiary surgical oncology single surgeon database was retrospectively reviewed for all patients undergoing BCS and SNB between January 2013 and December 2015. The single-incision approach used a single breast incision to resect the tumor and the Lymphazurin-tagged SNB. The multi-incision group used a breast incision and a separate axillary incision. Results The single-incision approach was associated with shorter operative time (56 vs 64 minutes, P = 0.026). Sentinel node retrieval was achieved in 100% in both groups. The single-incision technique was used primarily in the upper outer quadrant (N = 41, 85.4%), but was also selectively applied in other quadrants (N = 5). There was no significant difference in complication rates between the two procedures (P = 0.425), and there were no instances of conversion from single-incision to standard BCS-SNB. Conclusions Minimally invasive breast conserving surgery is feasible for patients with early breast cancer located in the upper outer quadrants. This technique may reduce postoperative morbidity and improved cosmetic result

The Safety of Same-day Discharge after Immediate Alloplastic Breast Reconstruction: A Systematic Review

Background:. Implant-based breast reconstruction can be accomplished in a variety of ways and can result in vastly different postoperative experiences for patients. The COVID-19 pandemic and recent trends have resulted in a shift toward outpatient management of these patients. Methods:. A systematic review of PubMed and Embase databases was conducted. A total of 1328 articles were identified on initial search, and after several rounds of review, a total of four met inclusion and exclusion criteria. Manuscripts were included if postmastectomy alloplastic breast reconstruction was performed, and there was documentation of same-day discharge. This cohort of patients was compared with traditional, planned overnight admission cohorts found in the literature. Objective data compared between groups included preoperative patient factors and postoperative complication rates. Results:. Four studies representing data on a total of 574 patients were included: 289 were same-day discharge and 285 were overnight admission. Patient characteristics of body mass index, radiation, smoking, and bilateral procedures were comparable. Tissue expanders were used more frequently than implants in both cohorts. The rate of overall complications was 33% for same-day discharge and 34% for overnight admission. Rates of major and minor complications, including infection, seroma, and hematoma, were similar. There was no increase in reoperations or readmissions reported in any of the studies. Conclusions:. Same-day discharge after mastectomy with immediate alloplastic reconstruction is a safe approach to treatment in both the ambulatory and hospital setting. There are comparable rates of common complications such as infection, seroma, and hematoma, with no increase in readmission or reoperation

18 Clinical, Socioeconomic, and Facility Factors Influencing Receipt of Autologous Breast Reconstruction: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

OBJECTIVES/GOALS: The goal of this study is to leverage a national database to see if autologous reconstruction rates differ in patient and clinical characteristics, readmission rates, and overall survival (OS) compared to other forms of reconstruction. Autologous reconstruction has not been looked at in this way before. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: • Aim 1: Use the National Cancer Data Base to construct three patient cohorts for women under 70 and above 18 treated surgically for breast cancer with A) mastectomy only, B) implant-based reconstruction, and C) autologous breast reconstruction. • Aim 2: Examine receipt rates of surgical intervention in Cohorts A vs. B vs. C based on clinical and patient demographic/socioeconomic characteristics. • Aim 3: Compare readmission and overall survival (OS) rates for Cohorts A vs. B vs. C while controlling for age and other key variables. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Based on the literature, we expect rates of autologous reconstruction (Cohort C) to be lower for patients of minority backgrounds compared to white individuals. In addition, we do not expect overall survival to differ between implant-based (Cohort B) and Cohort C reconstruction. Still, we expect mastectomy-only (Cohort A) survival to vary from the two cohorts even when adjusting for different clinical factors, as similar but smaller studies have shown. Finally, we expect readmission rates to be higher for Cohort C, compared to Cohorts A & B, as it is a more complicated procedure typically done in academic institutions with skilled surgeons. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Autologous reconstruction is now considered the gold standard due to its ability to restore the breast shape with higher patient satisfaction and superior long-term outcomes. Multiple studies have documented ongoing racial disparities in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction and autologous reconstruction, with lower rates and referrals