We have located links that may give you full text access.
The impact of partial breast reconstruction using reduction techniques on postoperative cancer surveillance.
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery 2009 July
BACKGROUND: Partial breast reconstruction using reduction techniques has recently increased in popularity. Some fear that combining breast conservation therapy with partial breast reconstruction alters the architecture and will affect patterns of local recurrence and make postoperative cancer surveillance more difficult. The purpose of this series was to evaluate long-term postoperative cancer surveillance.
METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts and mammograms of patients (n = 17; average follow-up, 6.3 years) who underwent the oncoplastic reduction technique before 2004. Mammography sensitivity was determined by measuring breast density, qualitative changes, and time until mammographic stabilization was determined. These data were compared with those of a control group from the same time period who underwent breast conservation therapy alone (n = 17; average follow-up, 5.9 years).
RESULTS: Typical mammographic findings, including architectural distortion, cysts, and calcifications, were similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in breast density scores. The oncoplastic reduction group had longer times to mammographic stabilization (21.2 versus 25.6 months, p = 0.23). There was a trend toward a greater number of postoperative mammograms and ultrasounds in the study group when indexed per follow-up year. The rate of tissue sampling in the study group was significantly higher (53 percent) than that in the control group (18 percent).
CONCLUSIONS: The oncoplastic reduction technique remains safe and effective, without significantly affecting postoperative surveillance. Mammographic findings were similar to those observed in patients with breast conservation therapy alone, and sensitivity was not affected. It takes longer to achieve mammographic stability and more patients in the oncoplastic group will require additional diagnostic testing.
METHODS: The authors retrospectively reviewed the charts and mammograms of patients (n = 17; average follow-up, 6.3 years) who underwent the oncoplastic reduction technique before 2004. Mammography sensitivity was determined by measuring breast density, qualitative changes, and time until mammographic stabilization was determined. These data were compared with those of a control group from the same time period who underwent breast conservation therapy alone (n = 17; average follow-up, 5.9 years).
RESULTS: Typical mammographic findings, including architectural distortion, cysts, and calcifications, were similar between the two groups. There was no significant difference in breast density scores. The oncoplastic reduction group had longer times to mammographic stabilization (21.2 versus 25.6 months, p = 0.23). There was a trend toward a greater number of postoperative mammograms and ultrasounds in the study group when indexed per follow-up year. The rate of tissue sampling in the study group was significantly higher (53 percent) than that in the control group (18 percent).
CONCLUSIONS: The oncoplastic reduction technique remains safe and effective, without significantly affecting postoperative surveillance. Mammographic findings were similar to those observed in patients with breast conservation therapy alone, and sensitivity was not affected. It takes longer to achieve mammographic stability and more patients in the oncoplastic group will require additional diagnostic testing.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Review article: Recent advances in ascites and acute kidney injury management in cirrhosis.Alimentary Pharmacology & Therapeutics 2024 March 26
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app