Journals / Akdeniz Tıp Dergisi / 2022 / Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3

Factors Influencing The Practice of Re-excision in Patiens Who Underwent Breast Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer

Meme Kanseri Nedeni ile Meme Koruyucu Cerrahi Uygulanan Hastalarda Re-eksizyon Uygulanmasını Etkileyen Faktörler

Pages
298–305
Publication Date
2022-10-11
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Patients should be informed for the risk of re-excision after initial breast conserving surgery and wider surgical excision or oncoplastic surgery should be performed in risky patients.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: A significant proportion of patients undergoing breast con- serving surgery require re-excision for residual cancer.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Methods: Patients underwent breast-conserving surgery in a 6-year period were included in this study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Patients should be informed for the risk of re-excision after initial breast conserving surgery and wider surgical excision or oncoplastic surgery should be performed in risky patients.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: A significant proportion of patients undergoing breast con- serving surgery require re-excision for residual cancer. This study aims to determine the factors associated with residual tumor in patients undergoing breast conserving surgery, and to evaluate the follow-up results of the patients. Material and Methods: Patients underwent breast-conserving surgery in a 6-year period were included in this study. Patients were divided in 2 groups; no re-excision (Group A), and required re-excision (Group B). Patients who underwent mastectomy in the follow-up were excluded. Results: In this study, 190 patients were assessed; those 153 in Group A, and 37 in Group B. A total 192 masses were found; 154 in Group A, and 38 in Group B. The median follow-up time, and disease free survival were 9.2 (Inter Quantile Range [IQR]=5.9-11.1) years, and 8.8 (IQR=5.0-11.0) years respec- tively. There was no difference in disease free survival, and local recurrence between groups (p=0.246, and p=0.601; respectively). Axillary lymph node involvement, lymphovas- cular invasion, extensive intraductal component, multifoca- lity, large tumor diameter and younger age patients were higher in re-excision group. Multivariate analysis identified, absence of lymphovascular invasion (Odds Ratio [OR]=0.05; %95Cl 0.01-0,44), and age >50 years (OR=0.17; %95Cl 0.04-0.73) were associated with lower re-excision require- ment; however, tumor diameter >2 cm (OR=4.52;%95Cl 1.28-15.98) was associated with re-excision. Conclusion: There was no difference in disease free survival, and local recurrence between 2 groups. Patients should be informed for the risk of re-excision after initial breast conserving surgery and wider surgical excision or oncoplastic surgery should be performed in risky patients.

Özet

Amaç: Meme koruyucu cerrahi geçiren hastaların önemli bir bölümünde rezidü kanser için re-eksizyon gereksinimi ortaya çıkmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, Meme koruyucu cerrahi uygulanan hastalarda rezidü tümör ile ilişkili faktörlerin belirlenmesi ve hastaların takipsonuçlarını değerlendirmektir. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Altı yıllık sürede, meme koruyucu cerrahi uygulanan hastalar çalışmaya alındı. Hastalar iki gruba ayrılarak incelendi: Re-eksizyon yapılmayanlar (Grup A), re-eksizyon yapılanlar (Grup B). Takiplerinde mastektomi yapılan hastalar çalışmadan çıkarıldı. Bulgular: Çalışmaya, 153’ü Grup A ve 37’si Grup B’de toplam 190 hasta dahil edildi. Toplamda 192 tümör saptandı; 154’ü Grup A, 38’i Grup B’de. Medyan takip süresi 9,2 yıl (Çeyrekler arası aralık [ÇAA]=5,9-11,1), medyan hastalıksız sağ kalım süresi 8,8 yıldı (ÇAA=5,0-11,0). Takiplerinde iki grup arasında hastalıksız sağ kalım ve lokal nüks açısından anlamlı fark olmadığı görüldü (sırasıyla; p=0.246, p=0.601). Genç hasta, büyük tümör çapı, lenfovasküler invazyon, aksiller lenf nodu tutulumu, yaygın intraduktal kompanent varlığı ve multifokalite, re-eksizyon grubunda fazlaydı. Çoklu değişken analiz, yaş >50 (Odds ratio [OR] 0,17 ve %95Cl 0,04-0,73) ve lenfovasküler invazyon yokluğunun (OR 0,05 ve %95Cl 0,01-0,44); re-eksizyon riskini azalttığını, tümör çapının 2 cm’den büyük olmasının (OR 4,52 ve %95Cl 1,28-15,98); re-eksizyon riskini arttırdığını gösterdi. Sonuç: Re-eksizyon yapılan ve yapılmayan hastalar arasında hastalıksız sağ kalım ve lokal nüks açısından fark yoktur. Riskli hastalar, tanı aşamasında re-eksizyon ihtimali konusunda bilgilendirilmeli, bu hastalarda daha geniş cerrahi eksizyon veya onkoplastik yöntemler tercih edilmelidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

ÜNAL, D. S., SARAÇOĞLU, M., DOĞRU, V., VURAL, V., YAPRAK, M., MESCİ, A., ARICI, C., OYGÜR, A. N. (2022). Factors Influencing The Practice of Re-excision in Patiens Who Underwent Breast Conserving Surgery for Breast Cancer. Akdeniz Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 8 - Sayı: 3, 298–305. https://ajindex.com/articles/434195

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (13)

  1. Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin 2018; 68(6):394–24
  2. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, et al. Twenty-Year Follow-up of a Randomized Trial Comparing Total Mastectomy, Lumpectomy, and Lumpectomy plus Irradiation for the Treatment of Invasive Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2022; 347(16):1233–41
  3. Veronesi U, Banfi A, Salvadori B, Luini A, Saccozzi R, Zucali R, et al. Breast conservation is the treatment of choice in small breast cancer: Long-term results of a randomized trial. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 1990;26(6):668–70
  4. Waljee JF, Hu ES, Newman LA, Alderman AK. Predictors of re-excision among women undergoing breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2008;15(5):1297–303
  5. Ozmen V, Ozmen T, Dogru V. Breast Cancer in Turkey; An Analysis of 20.000 Patients with Breast Cancer. Eur J Breast Heal 2019;15(3):141–6
  6. Obedian E, Haffty BG. Negative margin status improves local control in conservatively managed breast cancer patients. Cancer J Sci Am. 2000;6(1):28–33
  7. Singer L, Brown E, Lanni T. Margins in breast conserving surgery: The financial cost & potential savings associated with the new margin guidelines. Breast. 2016;28:1–4
  8. Abraham J, Aft R, Agnese D, Allison KH, Anderson BO, Blair SL, et al. NCCN Guidelines Version 1.2021 Breast Cancer. 2021
  9. Tran C-L, Langer S, Broderick-Villa G, DiFronzo LA. Does reoperation predispose to postoperative wound infection in women undergoing operation for breast cancer? Am Surg. 2003;69(10):852–6
  10. Smitt MC, Horst K. Association of clinical and pathologic variables with lumpectomy surgical margin status after preoperative diagnosis or excisional biopsy of invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(3):1040–4
  11. O’Sullivan MJ, Li T, Freedman G, Morrow M. The effect of multiple reexcisions on the risk of local recurrence after breast conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(11):3133–40
  12. Aziz D, Rawlinson E, Narod SA, Sun P, Lickley HLA, McCready DR, et al. The role of reexcision for positive margins in optimizing local disease control after breast-conserving surgery for cancer. Breast J. 2006;12(4):331–7
  13. Bani MR, Lux MP, Heusinger K, Wenkel E, Magener A, Schulz-Wendtland R, et al. Factors correlating with reexcision after breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Surg Oncol J Eur Soc Su