Annals of Surgical Oncology Sign the Guestbook
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Newman, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Singletary, S. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Newman, L. A.
Right arrow Articles by Singletary, S. E.

Annals of Surgical Oncology, Vol 6, Issue 7 671-675, Copyright © 1999 by Society of Surgical Oncology


ARTICLES

Feasibility of immediate breast reconstruction for locally advanced breast cancer

L. A. Newman, H. M. Kuerer, K. K. Hunt, F. C. Ames, M. I. Ross, R. Theriault, N. Fry, S. S. Kroll, G. L. Robb and S. E. Singletary
Department of Surgical Oncology, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston 77030, USA.

BACKGROUND: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been considered contraindicated for patients with locally advanced breast cancer (LABC). Our goal was to determine whether IBR resulted in delayed postoperative chemotherapy, increased postoperative complications, or increased risk of recurrent disease. METHODS: A prospective database of 540 modified radical mastectomies performed with IBR between 1990 and 1993 identified 50 patients with LABC. Postoperative management and outcome were compared to that of 72 patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy without IBR treated on a standardized LABC protocol using preoperative chemotherapy, postoperative chemotherapy, and radiotherapy during the same time period. RESULTS: Results were evaluated by chi2 analysis. The median ages for the patients with IBR versus those not undergoing IBR were 44 and 46 years, respectively. The stage distribution for the IBR patients versus patients not undergoing IBR was as follows: IIB, 46% versus 17%; IIIA, 44% versus 39%; and IIIB, 10% versus 44%. The types of IBR were transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) flap (68%), latissimus dorsi flap (2%), and implants (30%). Chemotherapy was given to all IBR patients: 24% preoperatively and 96% postoperatively. Radiotherapy was used in 40%. Four postoperative complications (8%) necessitated prolongation of hospitalization, including two patients requiring surgical debridement for partial flap loss; there were no complete flap losses. The incidences of major and minor wound complications in the group not undergoing IBR were 7% and 4%, respectively. Of the 15 patients receiving implant reconstruction, 7 (47%) required subsequent implant removal because of contractures or infections. The median interval between surgery and postoperative chemotherapy was 35 days for the IBR patients and 21 days for the patients not undergoing IBR. This difference was marginally significant (P =.05). With a median follow-up of 58.4 months, no significant differences in local or distant relapse rates were detected. CONCLUSIONS: IBR can be performed with low morbidity in patients with LABC. Use of autogenous tissue is preferable because of poor results with implants. IBR is associated with somewhat longer intervals to resumption of postoperative chemotherapy, but this does not appear to be clinically significant-the local and distant relapse rates are similar for LABC patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy with or without IBR.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
BMJHome page
S Ahmed, A Snelling, M Bains, and I H Whitworth
Breast reconstruction
BMJ, April 23, 2005; 330(7497): 943 - 948.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
S. Gouy, R. Rouzier, M.-C. Missana, D. Atallah, O. Youssef, and L. Barreau-Pouhaer
Immediate Reconstruction After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Effect on Adjuvant Treatment Starting and Survival
Ann. Surg. Oncol., February 1, 2005; 12(2): 161 - 166.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch SurgHome page
R. D. Foster, S. L. Hansen, L. J. Esserman, E. S. Hwang, C. Ewing, K. Lane, and J. P. Anthony
Safety of Immediate Transverse Rectus Abdominis Myocutaneous Breast Reconstruction for Patients With Locally Advanced Disease
Arch Surg, February 1, 2005; 140(2): 196 - 200.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
P. Ananian, G. Houvenaeghel, C. Protiere, P. Rouanet, S. Arnaud, J.P. Moatti, A. Tallet, A.C. Braud, and C. Julian-Reynier
Determinants of Patients' Choice of Reconstruction with Mastectomy for Primary Breast Cancer
Ann. Surg. Oncol., August 1, 2004; 11(8): 762 - 771.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
RadiologyHome page
B. S. Edeiken, B. D. Fornage, D. G. Bedi, N. Sneige, S. G. Parulekar, and J. Pleasure
Recurrence in Autogenous Myocutaneous Flap Reconstruction after Mastectomy for Primary Breast Cancer: US Diagnosis
Radiology, May 1, 2003; 227(2): 542 - 548.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Ann. Surg. Oncol.Home page
R. D. Foster, L. J. Esserman, J. P. Anthony, E.-s. S. Hwang, and H. Do
Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction: A Prospective Cohort Study for the Treatment of Advanced Stages of Breast Carcinoma
Ann. Surg. Oncol., June 1, 2002; 9(5): 462 - 466.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The OncologistHome page
A. C. Wolff and N. E. Davidson
Preoperative Therapy in Breast Cancer: Lessons from the Treatment of Locally Advanced Disease
Oncologist, June 1, 2002; 7(3): 239 - 245.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1999 by the Society of Surgical Oncology.