4.7 Article

Outcomes After Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients: A Systematic Literature Review

Journal

ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 23, Issue 10, Pages 3247-3258

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1245/s10434-016-5313-1

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Surgeons have increasingly performed breast-conserving surgery (BCS) utilizing oncoplastic techniques in place of standard lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer. We assess oncologic outcomes after oncoplastic BCS for T1-T2 breast cancer. A systematic literature review identified peer-reviewed articles in PubMed evaluating BCS with oncoplastic reconstruction. Selected studies reported on positive margin rate (PMR), re-excision rate (RR), conversion to mastectomy rate (CMR), overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), local recurrence (LR), distant recurrence (DR), complication rate, and/or cosmetic outcomes. The search yielded 474 articles; 55 met the inclusion criteria and collectively evaluated 6011 patients with a mean age 54.6 years over a mean follow-up 50.5 months. T1 (43.8 %) and T2 (39.3 %) invasive ductal carcinoma were the most common tumor histopathologies. PMR, RR, and CMR were 10.8, 6.0, and 6.2 %, respectively, while OS, DFS, LR and DR were 95.0, 90.0, 3.2, and 8.7 %, respectively. Margin widths were heterogeneously defined in studies that included margin assessment. The PMR was not significantly different when positive margins were defined as tumor < 10, < 5, < 2, and < 1 mm from ink margin, or tumor on ink (p = 0.162). Eleven studies reported specific margins for 1455 patients, of whom 143 (9.8 %) had positive margins, including 113 (7.8 %) with tumor on ink. This study is the largest comprehensive literature review to date on oncoplastic BCS. Our systematic review reveals high rates of OS and DFS with low LR, DR, PMR, RR, CMR and complication rates, thereby confirming the oncologic safety of this procedure in patients with T1-T2 invasive breast cancer.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available