The comparison of effectivity in breast cancer prevention between skin sparing and subcutaneous mastectomy - 20 years of experience.

Q4 Medicine
A Berkeš, L Streit, L Dražan, J Veselý, A Bajus, T Kubek, O Šedivý, K Kanuščák, K Feiková, O Strmiska, M Bohušová
{"title":"The comparison of effectivity in breast cancer prevention between skin sparing and subcutaneous mastectomy - 20 years of experience.","authors":"A Berkeš, L Streit, L Dražan, J Veselý, A Bajus, T Kubek, O Šedivý, K Kanuščák, K Feiková, O Strmiska, M Bohušová","doi":"10.48095/ccachp2023112","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Breast cancer is the leading cause of neoplasm mortality among women. Several prevention strategies have been implemented to early detect and prevent the cancer occurrence. The most effective protocol includes prevention mastectomy for the high-risk patients. In our study, we have compared the efficacy of subcutaneous mastectomy (SCM) and skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) in long-term follow up.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We have included 201 female patients who have been treated at our department over the course of 20 years between 2000 and 2019. All the patients were at high risk of developing breast cancer and therefore were indicated for the prophylactic mastectomy. The main indication was the presence of the mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 cluster, however, even in the lack of such mutation, the family history was sufficient for the mastectomy indication. Patients underwent either SCM, SSM or areola sparing mastectomy (ASM), and were allocated to aforementioned groups, respectively. We have collected the data regarding the reconstruction method along with age, weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and presence of predisposing genetic mutations such as BRCA positivity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The patients who underwent SSM compared to those who underwent SCM were of higher age, with higher BMI and body mass. The patients in SSM group had statistically significantly higher BMI than in ASM. There was no difference in efficacy between patients who underwent SSM and SCM. The majority of patients (91.5%) were positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. In our study, only four patients were tested negative for known breast cancer inducing mutation (three in SCM and one in SSM). The most common reconstruction method was an abdominal flap and breast implant.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Prophylactic mastectomy is a reliable strategy for significantly reducing the number of breast cancer incidence in high-risk patients regardless of the selected method of mastectomy. These operations allow for the subsequent reconstruction with the whole spectrum of reconstructive options.</p>","PeriodicalId":7098,"journal":{"name":"Acta chirurgiae plasticae","volume":"65 3-4","pages":"112-116"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Acta chirurgiae plasticae","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.48095/ccachp2023112","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Breast cancer is the leading cause of neoplasm mortality among women. Several prevention strategies have been implemented to early detect and prevent the cancer occurrence. The most effective protocol includes prevention mastectomy for the high-risk patients. In our study, we have compared the efficacy of subcutaneous mastectomy (SCM) and skin sparing mastectomy (SSM) in long-term follow up.

Methods: We have included 201 female patients who have been treated at our department over the course of 20 years between 2000 and 2019. All the patients were at high risk of developing breast cancer and therefore were indicated for the prophylactic mastectomy. The main indication was the presence of the mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 cluster, however, even in the lack of such mutation, the family history was sufficient for the mastectomy indication. Patients underwent either SCM, SSM or areola sparing mastectomy (ASM), and were allocated to aforementioned groups, respectively. We have collected the data regarding the reconstruction method along with age, weight, height, body mass index (BMI) and presence of predisposing genetic mutations such as BRCA positivity.

Results: The patients who underwent SSM compared to those who underwent SCM were of higher age, with higher BMI and body mass. The patients in SSM group had statistically significantly higher BMI than in ASM. There was no difference in efficacy between patients who underwent SSM and SCM. The majority of patients (91.5%) were positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation. In our study, only four patients were tested negative for known breast cancer inducing mutation (three in SCM and one in SSM). The most common reconstruction method was an abdominal flap and breast implant.

Conclusions: Prophylactic mastectomy is a reliable strategy for significantly reducing the number of breast cancer incidence in high-risk patients regardless of the selected method of mastectomy. These operations allow for the subsequent reconstruction with the whole spectrum of reconstructive options.

皮肤切除术与皮下乳房切除术在预防乳腺癌方面的效果比较 - 20 年的经验。
导言:乳腺癌是妇女死于肿瘤的主要原因。为了早期发现和预防癌症的发生,已经实施了多种预防策略。最有效的方案包括对高危患者进行预防性乳房切除术。在我们的研究中,我们比较了皮下乳房切除术(SCM)和保皮乳房切除术(SSM)在长期随访中的疗效:方法:我们纳入了 2000 年至 2019 年 20 年间在我科接受治疗的 201 名女性患者。所有患者都有罹患乳腺癌的高风险,因此都有接受预防性乳房切除术的指征。主要指征是存在 BRCA1 或 BRCA2 基因突变,但即使没有此类突变,家族史也足以作为乳房切除术的指征。患者分别接受了单乳切除术、双乳切除术或乳晕保留乳房切除术(ASM),并被分配到上述组别。我们收集了有关重建方法、年龄、体重、身高、体重指数(BMI)以及是否存在易感基因突变(如 BRCA 阳性)的数据:结果:与接受 SCM 术的患者相比,接受 SSM 术的患者年龄更大,体重指数和身体质量更高。据统计,SSM 组患者的体重指数明显高于 ASM 组。接受 SSM 和 SCM 治疗的患者在疗效上没有差异。大多数患者(91.5%)的 BRCA1 或 BRCA2 基因突变呈阳性。在我们的研究中,只有四名患者的已知乳腺癌诱导突变检测结果为阴性(三人接受了 SCM,一人接受了 SSM)。最常见的重建方法是腹部皮瓣和乳房假体:无论选择哪种乳房切除术,预防性乳房切除术都是显著降低高危患者乳腺癌发病率的可靠策略。这些手术允许在随后的重建中使用各种重建方案。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Acta chirurgiae plasticae
Acta chirurgiae plasticae Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信