TY - JOUR
T1 - Oncologic outcomes after immediate breast reconstruction following total mastectomy in patients with breast cancer
T2 - A matched case-control study
AU - Ryu, Jai Min
AU - Paik, Hyun June
AU - Park, Sungmin
AU - Yi, Ha Woo
AU - Nam, Seok Jin
AU - Kim, Seok Won
AU - Lee, Se Kyung
AU - Yu, Jonghan
AU - Bae, Soo Youn
AU - Lee, Jeong Eon
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Korean Breast Cancer Society. All rights reserved.
PY - 2017/3
Y1 - 2017/3
N2 - Purpose: The use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) following total mastectomy (TM) has increased markedly in patients with breast cancer. As the indications for IBR have been broadened and more breast-conserving surgery-eligible patients are undergoing IBR, comparing the oncologic safety between TM only and IBR following TM becomes more difficult. This study aimed to analyze the oncologic outcomes between TM only and IBR following TM via a matched case-control methodology. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent TM between 2008 and 2014. We excluded patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, including palliative chemotherapy, and had a follow-up duration < 12 months, inflammatory breast cancer, or incomplete data. We divided the remaining patients into two groups: those who underwent TM only (control group) and those who underwent IBR following TM (study group). The groups were propensity score-matched. Matched variables included age, pathologic stage, estrogen or progesterone receptor status, human epi dermal growth factor receptor 2 status, and year of operation. Results: After matching, 878 patients were enrolled in the control group and 580 patients in the study group. The median follow-up duration was 43.4 months (range, 11–100 months) for the control group and 41.3 months (range, 12–100 months) for the study group (p= 1.000). The mean age was 47.3±8.46 years for the control group and 43.9 ±7.14 years for the study group (p> 0.050). Matching was considered successful for the matching variables and other factors, such as family history, histology, multiplicity, and lymphovascular invasion. There were no significant differences in overall survival (log-rank p= 0.454), disease-free survival (log-rank p= 0.186), local recurrence-free survival (log-rank p= 0.114), or distant metastasis-free survival rates (log-rank p= 0.537) between the two groups. Conclusion: Our results suggest that IBR following TM is a feasible treatment option for patients with breast cancer.
AB - Purpose: The use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) following total mastectomy (TM) has increased markedly in patients with breast cancer. As the indications for IBR have been broadened and more breast-conserving surgery-eligible patients are undergoing IBR, comparing the oncologic safety between TM only and IBR following TM becomes more difficult. This study aimed to analyze the oncologic outcomes between TM only and IBR following TM via a matched case-control methodology. Methods: A retrospective review was conducted to identify all patients who underwent TM between 2008 and 2014. We excluded patients who underwent neoadjuvant chemotherapy, including palliative chemotherapy, and had a follow-up duration < 12 months, inflammatory breast cancer, or incomplete data. We divided the remaining patients into two groups: those who underwent TM only (control group) and those who underwent IBR following TM (study group). The groups were propensity score-matched. Matched variables included age, pathologic stage, estrogen or progesterone receptor status, human epi dermal growth factor receptor 2 status, and year of operation. Results: After matching, 878 patients were enrolled in the control group and 580 patients in the study group. The median follow-up duration was 43.4 months (range, 11–100 months) for the control group and 41.3 months (range, 12–100 months) for the study group (p= 1.000). The mean age was 47.3±8.46 years for the control group and 43.9 ±7.14 years for the study group (p> 0.050). Matching was considered successful for the matching variables and other factors, such as family history, histology, multiplicity, and lymphovascular invasion. There were no significant differences in overall survival (log-rank p= 0.454), disease-free survival (log-rank p= 0.186), local recurrence-free survival (log-rank p= 0.114), or distant metastasis-free survival rates (log-rank p= 0.537) between the two groups. Conclusion: Our results suggest that IBR following TM is a feasible treatment option for patients with breast cancer.
KW - Breast neoplasms
KW - Mammaplasty
KW - Treatment outcome
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85017188654
U2 - 10.4048/jbc.2017.20.1.74
DO - 10.4048/jbc.2017.20.1.74
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85017188654
SN - 1738-6756
VL - 20
SP - 74
EP - 81
JO - Journal of Breast Cancer
JF - Journal of Breast Cancer
IS - 1
ER -