Search

Background: Future innovations in science and technology with an impact on multimodal breast cancer management from a surgical perspective are discussed in this narrative review. The work was undertaken in response to the Commission on the Future of Surgery project initiated by the Royal College of Surgeons of England., Methods: Expert opinion was sought around themes of surgical de-escalation, reduction in treatment morbidities, and improving the accuracy of breast-conserving surgery in terms of margin status. There was emphasis on how the primacy of surgical excision in an era of oncoplastic and reconstructive surgery is increasingly being challenged, with more effective systemic therapies that target residual disease burden, and permit response-adapted approaches to both breast and axillary surgery., Results: Technologies for intraoperative margin assessment can potentially half re-excision rates after breast-conserving surgery, and sentinel lymph node biopsy will become a therapeutic procedure for many patients with node-positive disease treated either with surgery or chemotherapy as the primary modality. Genomic profiling of tumours can aid in the selection of patients for neoadjuvant and adjuvant therapies as well as prevention strategies. Molecular subtypes are predictive of response to induction therapies and reductive approaches to surgery in the breast or axilla., Conclusion: Treatments are increasingly being tailored and based on improved understanding of tumour biology and relevant biomarkers to determine absolute benefit and permit delivery of cost-effective healthcare. Patient involvement is crucial for breast cancer studies to ensure relevance and outcome measures that are objective, meaningful, and patient-centred., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction with acellular dermal matrix has become an increasingly popular option for selected patients. There are no randomized data to demonstrate short- or long-term outcomes. Cohort studies to date have demonstrated safety, but risk factors for complications are unknown., Methods: A prospective cohort study of all patients undergoing prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction between 2013 and 2019. Clinical factors and those related to reconstruction were analysed in relation to complications and implant loss using univariable and multivariable logistic regression., Results: A total of 469 reconstructions were undertaken in 289 women; the majority of reconstructions were performed using a one-stage direct-to-implant technique with acellular dermal matrix. Median follow-up was 21 (range 2-71) months. Minor complications were seen after 11·2 per cent of reconstructions, major complications after 5·9 per cent, and the rate of implant loss by 3 months was 3·1 per cent. In the final multivariable model, sentinel node biopsy (odds ratio (OR) 5·06, 95 per cent c.i. 2·00 to 12·80), axillary clearance (OR 6·67, 1·17 to 37·94) and adjuvant radiotherapy (OR 7·11, 1·60 to 31·61) were independent risk factors for development of a major complication, and sentinel node biopsy (OR 4·32, 1·23 to 15·22) for implant loss., Conclusion: Prepectoral implant-based breast reconstruction has acceptable medium-term results but careful patient selection is advised., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of BJS Society Ltd. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Introduction: Management of perianal abscesses has remained largely unchanged for over 50 years. The evidence for postoperative wound packing is limited and may expose patients to painful procedures with no clinical benefit and at considerable increased cost., Methods: Patients were recruited in 15 UK centres between December 2013 and October 2014. Outcome measures included number of dressing (pack) changes, healing, recurrence, return to work/normal function, postoperative fistula in ano and health utility scores (EQ-5D™). Pain was measured before, during and after dressing change on a visual analogue scale., Results: Some 141 patients were recruited (median age 39 (range 18-86) years). The mean number of dressing changes in the first 3 weeks was 13 (range 0-21), equating to an annual cost to the National Health Service of €6 453 360 in England alone per annum. Some 43·8 per cent of wounds were healed by 8 weeks after surgery and 86 per cent of patients had returned to normal function. Some 7·6 per cent of abscesses had recurred and 26·7 per cent of patients developed a fistula in ano by 6 months following surgery. Patients reported a twofold to threefold increase in pain scores during and after dressing changes., Conclusion: Recurrent abscess is rare and fistula occurs in one-quarter of the patients. Packing is painful and costly., (© 2016 BJS Society Ltd Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: No randomized trial has yet studied venous thromboembolism (VTE) prophylaxis in patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer., Methods: Relevant articles were identified using Medline searches. Secondary articles were identified from the reference lists of key papers., Results and Conclusion: The absence of randomized trials comparing different methods of VTE prophylaxis with controls makes an evidence-based consensus among breast cancer surgeons difficult. Intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) and graduated compression (GC) are effective in reducing VTE without the haemorrhagic complications associated with heparin; their effects are additive. The authors suggest the following strategy. All patients undergoing surgery for breast cancer should receive both IPC and GC, with heparin reserved for those at very high risk. A controlled trial should randomize women to receive heparin or not, and all women should have both IPC and GC. The primary endpoints should be the development of VTE and/or haemorrhagic complications.