Cargando…

Oncoplastic breast surgery versus conventional breast‐conserving surgery: a comparative retrospective study

BACKGROUND: In addition to conventional breast‐conserving surgery (BCS), oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is an operation technique that strives simultaneously to increase oncological safety and patient's satisfaction. It is the combination of the best‐proven techniques in plastic surgery with...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Behluli, Ilmi, Le Renard, Pol‐Edern, Rozwag, Kamila, Oppelt, Peter, Kaufmann, Andreas, Schneider, Achim
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6849881/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30990940
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ans.15245
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: In addition to conventional breast‐conserving surgery (BCS), oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS) is an operation technique that strives simultaneously to increase oncological safety and patient's satisfaction. It is the combination of the best‐proven techniques in plastic surgery with surgery for breast cancer. In a growing number of indications, OBS overcomes the limit of conventional BCS by allowing larger resection volumes while avoiding deformities. The aim of our retrospective study (2012–2014) was to compare oncological outcomes of OBS versus BCS. METHODS: We compared two groups of patients with primary non‐metastatic breast tumours: group A (n = 291), where BCS was performed, versus group B (n = 52), where OBS was performed. Surgical interventions were performed in German and Swiss teaching hospital settings. The surgeon for group B had subspecialist training in OBS. We assessed outcome in term of re‐excision rates, resection margin and complications. RESULTS: Groups were homogenous (no significant differences in terms of age, tumour size, tumour type or grade). The resection margin was larger in group B (7 mm) than in group A (3 mm). Re‐excision rate of group B (8%) was significantly lower than in group A (31%). Complication rates were comparably low in groups A and B. CONCLUSION: Despite the limits of retrospective design, our study confirms that OBS is safe and reduces the re‐excision rates and the need for further surgery. OBS has the potential to improve oncological care and should be more widely adopted.