Changes in surgical management resulting from case review at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board

BACKGROUND The treatment of breast cancer requires a multidisciplinary approach, and patients are often referred to a multidisciplinary cancer clinic. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the impact of this approach on the surgical management of breast cancer. METHODS The medical records of 149 consecutive patients referred to a multidisciplinary breast cancer clinic over a 1-year period with a diagnosis of breast cancer were reviewed retrospectively for alterations in radiologic, pathologic, surgical, and medical interpretations and the effect that these alterations had on recommendations for surgical management. RESULTS A review of the imaging studies resulted in changes in interpretations in 67 of the 149 patients studied (45%). This resulted in a change in surgical management in 11% of patients. Review of the pathology resulted in changes in the interpretation for 43 of the 149 patients (29%). Thirteen patients (9%) had surgical management changes made solely as a result of pathologic reinterpretation. In 51 patients (34%), a change in surgical management was recommended after discussion with the surgeons, medical oncologists, and radiation oncologists that was not based on reinterpretation of the radiologic or pathologic findings. Overall, a second evaluation of patients referred to a multidisciplinary tumor board led to changes in the recommendations for surgical management in 77 of 149 of those patients studied (52%). CONCLUSIONS The changes in management stemmed from differences in mammographic interpretation, pathologic interpretation, and evaluation by medical and radiation oncologists and surgical breast specialists. Multidisciplinary review can provide patients with useful additional information when making difficult treatment decisions. Cancer 2006. © 2006 American Cancer Society.Peer Reviewedhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/55868/1/22266_ftp.pd

Predictors of patients’ choices for breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy: a prospective study

A study was undertaken to describe the treatment preferences and choices of patients with breast cancer, and to identify predictors of undergoing breast-conserving therapy (BCT) or mastectomy (MT). Consecutive patients with stage I/II breast cancer were eligible. Information about predictor variables, including socio-demographics, quality of life, patients' concerns, decision style, decisional conflict and perceived preference of the surgeon was collected at baseline, before decision making and surgery. Patients received standard information (n = 88) or a decision aid (n = 92) as a supplement to support decision making. A total of 180 patients participated in the study. In all, 72% decided to have BCT (n = 123); 28% chose MT (n = 49). Multivariate analysis showed that what patients perceived to be their surgeons' preference and the patients' concerns regarding breast loss and local tumour recurrence were the strongest predictors of treatment preference. Treatment preferences in itself were highly predictive of the treatment decision. The decision aid did riot influence treatment choice. The results of this study demonstrate that patients' concerns and their perceptions of the treatment preferences of the physicians are important factors in patients' decision making. Adequate information and communication are essential to base treatment decisions on realistic concerns, and the treatment preferences of patients, (C) 2004 Cancer Research U

The Use of Hydrodissection in Nipple- and Skin-sparing Mastectomy : A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: Hydrodissection (HD) is a method to create a subcutaneous and prepectoral plane during mastectomy using a mixture of crystalloid solution with local anesthetic and epinephrine. The aim of this study was to evaluate postoperative complications and surgical outcomes of this technique compared with standard mastectomy. Methods: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent bilateral risk-reducing, nipple-sparing mastectomy and immediate implant-based reconstruction through an inframammary crease incision either with standard electrocautery (control group) or HD (HD group) between January 2013 and January 2017. Patient demographics, procedural details, surgical outcomes, and complications were compared using nonparametric statistical tests and logistic regression analysis. Results: Forty-one patients (82 nipple-sparing mastectomies) were analyzed (23 patients in the HD group and 18 in the control group). Patients' demographics were similar for both groups. Surgical time was shorter with HD compared with standard mastectomy (median 168 versus 207.5 minutes, P = 0.016) with shorter median hospital stay (2 versus 2.5 days, P = 0.033). Complication rates were similar in both groups, and fewer patients in the HD group required Coleman fat transfer to improve cosmesis (12 versus 3, P = 0.003). Conclusions: HD mastectomy is a safe alternative to standard technique in selected patients. Further surgical research to explore the role of HD in a wider clinical setting is warranted