Rocco Nicola, Catanuto Giuseppe, Nava Maurizio Bruno
1 Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples "Federico II", Via S. Pansini 5, 80131 Naples, Italy ; 2 Multidisciplinary Breast Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera Cannizzaro, Via Messina 829, 95126 Catania, Italy ; 3 Scuola di Oncologia Chirurgica Ricostruttiva, Via Besana 4, 20122 Milano, Italy.
Gland Surg. 2015 Dec;4(6):506-18. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2227-684X.2015.04.19.
Besides the diffusion of breast reconstructive techniques, several "conservative" approaches in mastectomy have been developed, in order to perform an immediate reconstruction with better aesthetic results: the skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM), the nipple-areola complex (NAC)-sparing mastectomy (NSM) and the skin-reducing mastectomy (SRM). During the last decade, SSMs and NSMs have gained widespread acceptance and are currently considered standard treatment for early breast cancer. We would like to investigate the evidence behind this radical shift towards conservative mastectomies, where there has been a renewed interest worldwide.
We reviewed English literature by consulting the following databases: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) search portal and Clinicaltrials.gov. The objective is to include any randomized controlled trial (RCT) comparing a "conservative mastectomy" technique to breast conservative surgery or modified radical mastectomy (MRM) for the treatment of early-stage breast cancer. In the absence of randomized trials, we took into account prospective cohorts and retrospective series for a narrative description of available evidence.
Our review included 58 studies [19 prospective cohorts (34%) and 39 retrospective series (66%)] considering NSM and immediate reconstruction and ten studies [1 prospective cohort (10%) and 9 (90%) retrospective series] considering SSM and immediate reconstruction. In the NSM group, 29 studies reported data about complication rates and 42 studies presented data on NAC partial or complete necrosis. In the NSM group 45 studies and all the studies in the SSM group presented data on local and NAC recurrence.
In order to achieve higher levels of evidence, RCTs comparing conservative mastectomies to traditional mastectomy and breast conservative surgery would be desirable. However we can conclude that conservative mastectomies offer the psychological advantages of good cosmetics and maintenance of woman body image without compromising the oncological safety of mastectomy.
除了乳房重建技术的推广外,为了实现即时重建并获得更好的美学效果,在乳房切除术中还开发了几种“保守”方法:保留皮肤的乳房切除术(SSM)、保留乳头乳晕复合体(NAC)的乳房切除术(NSM)和皮肤缩减乳房切除术(SRM)。在过去十年中,SSM和NSM已获得广泛认可,目前被视为早期乳腺癌的标准治疗方法。我们希望研究这种向保守乳房切除术的根本性转变背后的证据,全球对此重新产生了兴趣。
我们通过查阅以下数据库回顾英文文献:Medline、Embase、Cochrane对照试验注册库、世界卫生组织(WHO)国际临床试验注册平台(ICTRP)搜索门户和Clinicaltrials.gov。目的是纳入任何比较“保守乳房切除术”技术与乳房保乳手术或改良根治性乳房切除术(MRM)治疗早期乳腺癌的随机对照试验(RCT)。在缺乏随机试验的情况下,我们考虑了前瞻性队列和回顾性系列,以对现有证据进行叙述性描述。
我们的综述纳入了58项研究[19项前瞻性队列研究(34%)和39项回顾性系列研究(66%)],涉及NSM和即时重建,以及10项研究[1项前瞻性队列研究(10%)和9项(90%)回顾性系列研究],涉及SSM和即时重建。在NSM组中,29项研究报告了并发症发生率的数据,42项研究提供了NAC部分或完全坏死的数据。在NSM组中,45项研究以及SSM组中的所有研究都提供了局部和NAC复发的数据。
为了获得更高水平的证据,比较保守乳房切除术与传统乳房切除术和乳房保乳手术的RCT是可取的。然而,我们可以得出结论,保守乳房切除术在不影响乳房切除术肿瘤学安全性的情况下,具有良好美容效果和维护女性身体形象的心理优势。