Visnu Lohsiriwat

The oncologic outcome and immediate surgical complications of lipofilling in breast cancer patients: a multicenter study--Milan-Paris-Lyon experience of 646 lipofilling procedures.

Background: Lipofilling is now performed to improve the breast contour, after both breast-conserving surgery and breast reconstruction. However, injection of fat into a previous tumor site may create a new environment for cancer and adjacent cells. There is also no international agreement regarding lipofilling after breast cancer treatment. Methods: The authors included three institutions specializing in both breast cancer treatment and breast reconstruction (European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy; Paris Breast Center, Paris, France; and Leon Berard Centre, Lyon, France) for a multicenter study. A collective chart review of all lipofilling procedures after breast cancer treatment was performed. Results: From 2000 to 2010, the authors reviewed 646 lipofilling procedures from 513 patients. There were 370 mastectomy patients and 143 breast-conserving surgery patients. There were 405 patients (78.9 percent) with invasive carcinoma and 108 (21.1 percent) with carcinoma in situ. The average interval between oncologic surgical interventions and lipofilling was 39.7 months. Average follow-up after lipofilling was 19.2 months. The authors observed a complication rate of 2.8 percent (liponecrosis, 2.0 percent). Twelve radiologic images appeared after lipofilling in 119 breast-conserving surgery cases (10.1 percent). The overall oncologic event rate was 5.6 percent (3.6 percent per year). The locoregional event rate was 2.4 percent (1.5 percent per year). Conclusions: Lipofilling after breast cancer treatment leads to a low complication rate and does not affect radiologic follow-up after breast-conserving surgery. A prospective clinical registry including high-volume multicenter data with a long follow-up is warranted to demonstrate the oncologic safety. Until then, lipofilling should be performed in experienced hands, and a cautious oncologic follow-up protocol is advised. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, II. Figure. No caption available.

Locoregional recurrence risk after lipofilling in breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND Lipofilling has been indicated for postmastectomy and postlumpectomy breast reconstruction. The clinical literatures underline its technical efficacy but experimental studies raise important questions about the potential detrimental effect of adipocytes on the stimulation of cancer growth and reappearance. DESIGN We collected 321 consecutive patients operated for a primary breast cancer between 1997 and 2008 who subsequently underwent lipofilling for reconstructive purpose. For each patient, we selected two matched patients with similar characteristics who did not undergo a lipofilling. RESULTS Eighty-nine percent of the tumors were invasive. Median follow-up was 56 months from the primary surgery and 26 months from the lipofilling. Eight and 19 patients had a local event in the lipofilling and control group, respectively, leading to comparable cumulative incidence curves [P = 0.792; Hazard RatioLipovs No lipo = 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.47-2.64)]. These results were confirmed when patients undergoing quadrantectomy and mastectomy were analyzed separately and when the analysis was limited to invasive tumors. Based on 37 cases, the lipofilling group resulted at higher risk of local events when the analysis was limited to intraepithelial neoplasia. CONCLUSIONS Lipofilling seems to be a safe procedure in breast cancer patients. Longer follow-up and further experiences from oncological series are urgently required to confirm these findings.BACKGROUND Lipofilling has been indicated for postmastectomy and postlumpectomy breast reconstruction. The clinical literatures underline its technical efficacy but experimental studies raise important questions about the potential detrimental effect of adipocytes on the stimulation of cancer growth and reappearance. DESIGN We collected 321 consecutive patients operated for a primary breast cancer between 1997 and 2008 who subsequently underwent lipofilling for reconstructive purpose. For each patient, we selected two matched patients with similar characteristics who did not undergo a lipofilling. RESULTS Eighty-nine percent of the tumors were invasive. Median follow-up was 56 months from the primary surgery and 26 months from the lipofilling. Eight and 19 patients had a local event in the lipofilling and control group, respectively, leading to comparable cumulative incidence curves [P = 0.792; Hazard Ratio(Lipo vs No lipo) = 1.11 (95% confidence interval 0.47-2.64)]. These results were confirmed when patients undergoing quadrantectomy and mastectomy were analyzed separately and when the analysis was limited to invasive tumors. Based on 37 cases, the lipofilling group resulted at higher risk of local events when the analysis was limited to intraepithelial neoplasia. CONCLUSIONS Lipofilling seems to be a safe procedure in breast cancer patients. Longer follow-up and further experiences from oncological series are urgently required to confirm these findings.

Evaluation of fat grafting safety in patients with intra epithelial neoplasia: a matched-cohort study

BACKGROUND Fat grafting is widely carried out in breast cancer patients to improve quality in breast reconstruction. Recently, in vitro and animal studies have questioned the role of adipose tissues in cancer development. DESIGNS Matched-cohort study. We analysed: (i) 59 intraepithelial neoplasia patients who had undergone lipofilling, with no recurrence between primary surgery and lipofilling. (ii) A control group of 118 matched patients (two controls per lipofilling patient) with the corresponding recurrence-free intervals. Both groups were also matched for main cancer criteria. A local event (LE) was the primary end point, with follow-up starting from the baseline. RESULTS Median follow-up was 63 and 66 months from surgery, and 38 and 42 from baseline, for the lipofilling and control groups, respectively; the 5-year cumulative incidence of LE was 18% and 3% (P = 0.02). Ki-67 was the significant factor in univariate survival analysis. A subgroup analysis showed that lipofilling increased the risk of LE in women <50 years, with high grade neoplasia, Ki-67 ≥ 14 or who had undergone quadrantectomy. CONCLUSION Higher risk of LE was observed in intraepithelial neoplasia patients following lipofilling. Although further studies are required to validate our conclusions, patients belonging to this subgroup should be informed of these results and the potential risks.

Nipple sparing mastectomy: Can we predict the factors predisposing to necrosis?

BACKGROUND Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) is an accepted surgical approach in selected breast cancer and prophylactic mastectomy, nevertheless post-mastectomy skin necrosis is one of the frequent complications. This study aimed to analyze the factors that may lead to skin necrosis after NSM. PATIENTS AND METHODS From May 2010 to July 2010, we prospectively registered 50 consecutive NSM from 45 patients. There were 40 mastectomies for cancer, and 10 prophylactic mastectomies. The various patients and surgical factors were registered during pre-, intra- and postoperative period. RESULTS No total necrosis of the nipple areola complex (NAC) was observed. There were thirteen cases with partial necrosis (26.0%) of the areola or the adjacent skin. All these necrosis were partial both for the surface and the thickness. Surgical debridement was performed in 9 (18.0%) cases. The significant risk factors are smoking, young age, type of incision and NAC involvement with areola flap thickness less than 5 mm. CONCLUSION NSM should be done with high caution in smokers. Young patients, periareolar incision and superior circumareolar incision have also a higher risk of necrosis. We recommend keeping areolar flap thickness more than 5 mm in areola region.

Risk factors associated with recurrence after nipple-sparing mastectomy for invasive and intraepithelial neoplasia

BACKGROUND To identify risk factors of recurrence in a large series of patients with breast cancer who underwent a nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). PATIENTS AND METHODS Breast-related recurrences and local recurrences (LR) in the breast and the nipple areola complex (NAC) were studied. Cumulative incidences of events were estimated through competing risk analysis. Multivariate Cox regression models were also applied. RESULTS We identified 934 consecutive NSM patients during 2002-2007. Median follow-up was 50 months. In 772 invasive carcinoma patients, the rate of LR in the breast and in the NAC was 3.6% and 0.8%, respectively. In the 162 patients with intraepithelial neoplasia, the rate of LR in the breast and in the NAC was 4.9% and 2.9%, respectively. The significant risk factors of LR in the breast for the group A were grade, overexpression/amplification of HER2/neu and breast cancer molecular subtype Luminal B. In group B, the risk factors of LR in the breast and in the NAC were age (<45 years), absence of estrogen receptors, grade, HER2/neu overexpression and high Ki-67. CONCLUSIONS The LR rate after NSM in our series was low. Biological features of disease and young age should be taken into account when considering NSM in breast cancer patients.BACKGROUND To identify risk factors of recurrence in a large series of patients with breast cancer who underwent a nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM). PATIENTS AND METHODS Breast-related recurrences and local recurrences (LR) in the breast and the nipple areola complex (NAC) were studied. Cumulative incidences of events were estimated through competing risk analysis. Multivariate Cox regression models were also applied. RESULTS We identified 934 consecutive NSM patients during 2002-2007. Median follow-up was 50 months. In 772 invasive carcinoma patients, the rate of LR in the breast and in the NAC was 3.6% and 0.8%, respectively. In the 162 patients with intraepithelial neoplasia, the rate of LR in the breast and in the NAC was 4.9% and 2.9%, respectively. The significant risk factors of LR in the breast for the group A were grade, overexpression/amplification of HER2/neu and breast cancer molecular subtype Luminal B. In group B, the risk factors of LR in the breast and in the NAC were age (<45 years), absence of estrogen receptors, grade, HER2/neu overexpression and high Ki-67. CONCLUSIONS The LR rate after NSM in our series was low. Biological features of disease and young age should be taken into account when considering NSM in breast cancer patients.

Adipose tissue cells, lipotransfer and cancer: A challenge for scientists, oncologists and surgeons

Despite recent evidence of the cancer-promoting role of adipose tissue-derived progenitor and differentiated cells, the use of lipotransfer for tissue/organ reconstruction after surgical removal of cancer is increasing worldwide. Here we discuss in a multidisciplinary fashion the preclinical data connecting obesity, adipose cells and cancer progression, as well as the clinical data concerning safety of lipotransfer procedures in cancer patients. A roadmap towards a more rationale use of lipotransfer in oncology is urgently needed and should include preclinical studies to dissect the roles of different adipose tissue-derived cells, the evaluation of drugs currently candidate to inhibit the interaction between adipose and tumor cells, and carefully designed clinical trials to investigate the safety of lipotransfer procedures in cancer patients.

Comparison of the ionic silver-containing hydrofiber and paraffin gauze dressing on split-thickness skin graft donor sites.

The split-thickness skin graft (STSG) donor site dressing has been an inconclusive topic. Each of the Hydrofiber (Aquacel, ConvaTec A Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Deeside, UK) and silver dressings have applied in many types of wound care with favorable outcomes. Our study compared the ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber dressing and paraffin gauze dressing. The subjects were randomized into group A: ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber and group B: paraffin gauze. From February 2006 to 2007, 20 donor sites were recorded. The mean donor site surface area was 145.5 cm2 (group A) and 135.8 cm2 (group B). The completed re-epithelization day was 7.90 and 11.20 days, respectively (P = 0.031). The average pain score at rest were 0.74 and 0.80, respectively (P = 0.894). The average pain score on dressing removal were 3.12 and 4.70, respectively (P = 0.027). There was no infection or seroma in both groups. In conclusion, ionic silver-containing Hydrofiber dressing can reduce STSG donor site pain and promote re-epithelization compared to paraffin gauze dressing.

Nipple Sparing Mastectomy: Does Breast Morphological Factor Related to Necrotic Complications?

Background: Nipple sparing mastectomy (NSM) can be performed for prophylactic mastectomy and the treatment of selected breast cancer with oncologic safety. The risk of skin and nipple necrosis is a frequent complication of NSM procedure, and it is usually related to surgical technique. However, the role of the breast morphology should be also investigated. Method: We prospectively performed an analysis of 124 NSM from September 2012 to January 2013 at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, Italy, focusing on necrotic complications. We analyzed the association between the risks of skin necrosis and the breast morphology of the patients. Results: Among 124 NSM in 113 patients, NSM procedures were associated with necrosis in 22 mastectomies (17.7%) among which included partial necrosis of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) in 15 of 124 NSM (12.1%) and total necrosis in 4 cases (3.5%). The NAC was removed in 5 NSM cases (4%). The volume of breast removed was the only significant factor increasing the risk of skin necrosis. The degree of ptosis was not significantly related to the necrosis risk. Conclusions: Large glandular specimen increases the risk of NAC necrosis. The degree of ptosis and the distance between the sternal notch and the NAC have no significant impact on necrotic complications in NSM. To reduce the necrotic complications in large breast after NSM, reconstruction should better be performed with autologous flap or slow skin expansion using the expander technique.

Breast cancer subtype approximations and loco-regional recurrence after immediate breast reconstruction

BACKGROUND A small but significant proportion of patients with breast cancer (BC) will develop loco-regional recurrence (LRR) after immediate breast reconstruction (IBR). The LRR also varies according to breast cancer subtypes and clinicopathological features. METHODS We studied 1742 consecutive BC patients with IBR between 1997 and 2006. According to St Gallen conference consensus 2011, its BC approximations were applied to classify BC into five subtypes: estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR) positive, HER2 negative, and low Ki67 (<14%) [luminal A]; ER and/or PgR positive, HER2 negative and high Ki67(≥ 14%) [luminal B/HER2 negative]; ER and/or PgR positive, any Ki67 and HER2 positive [luminal B/HER2 positive]; ER negative, PgR negative and HER2 positive [HER2 positive/nonluminal]; and ER negative, PgR negative and HER2 negative [triple negative]. Cumulative incidences of LRR were compared across different subgroups by means of the Gray test. Multivariable Cox regression models were applied. RESULTS Median follow up time was 74 months (range 3-165). The cumulative incidence of LRR was 5.5% (121 events). The 5-year cumulative incidence of LRR was 2.5% for luminal A; 5.0% for luminal B/HER2 negative; 9.8% for luminal B/HER2 positive; 3.8% for HER2 non luminal; and 10.9% for triple negative. On multivariable analysis, tumor size (pT) >2 cm, body mass index (BMI) ≥ 25, triple negative and luminal B/HER2 positive subtypes were associated with increased risk of LRR. CONCLUSION Luminal B/HER2 positive, triple negative subtypes and BMI ≥ 25 are independent prognostic factors for risk of LRR after IBR.

Immediate breast reconstruction with expander in pregnant breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND Breast reconstruction after mastectomy is currently considered an essential component in managing breast cancer patients, particularly those diagnosed at a young age. However, no studies have been published on the feasibility of immediate breast reconstruction in patients diagnosed and operated during the course of gestation. METHOD We retrospectively identified all breast cancer patients who were subjected to mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction during pregnancy at the European Institute of Oncology between 2002 and 2012. Patient demographics, gestational age at surgery, tumor stage, adjuvant treatment, details of the surgical procedures, surgical outcomes and fetal outcomes were analyzed. RESULTS A total of 78 patients with breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy were subjected to a surgical procedure during the course of gestation. Twenty-two patients had mastectomy; of whom 13 were subjected to immediate breast reconstruction. Twelve out of 13 patients had a two-stage procedure with tissue expander insertion. Median gestational age at surgery was 16 weeks. No major surgical complications were encountered. Only one patient elected to have an abortion, otherwise, no spontaneous abortions or pregnancy complications were reported. Median gestational age at delivery was 35 weeks (range: 32-40 weeks). No major congenital malformations were reported. At a median follow-up of 32 months, all patients are alive with no long-term surgical complications. CONCLUSIONS This is the first study of immediate breast reconstruction in pregnant breast cancer patients. Tissue expander insertion appears to ensure a short operative time, and does not seem to be associated with considerable morbidity to the patient or the fetus. Hence, it could be considered in the multidisciplinary management of women diagnosed with breast cancer during pregnancy.