Department of Breast Disease, Peking University People's Hospital, Beijing, 100044, China.
Department of General Surgery, Beijing Friendship Hospital, Capital Medical University, 95 Yong-an Road, Xi-Cheng District, Beijing, 100050, China.
Surg Endosc. 2023 May;37(5):3842-3851. doi: 10.1007/s00464-023-09862-6. Epub 2023 Jan 25.
This study compares the perioperative results, aesthetic outcome and oncologic safety of single-port insufflation endoscopic nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy combined with immediate reconstruction using prosthesis implantation (SIE-NSM-IRPI) with those of conventional open-nipple and areola-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy combined with immediate reconstruction using prosthesis implantation (C-NSM-IRPI).
In this retrospective cohort study, 64 early-stage breast cancer patients were divided into SIE-NSM-IRPI (n = 38) and C-NSM-IRPI (n = 26) groups. Perioperative results (operation time, intraoperative blood loss, incision length, drainage duration, and recent complications) were then compared between the two groups. Differences in satisfaction with the breasts, psychosocial well-being, physical well-being (chest) and sexual well-being were analyzed according to the BREAST-Q scale, and survival outcomes were also compared.
The median follow-up time was 51.5 months. The incision length of SIE-NSM-IRPI was shorter than that of C-NSM-IRPI (P < 0.001). SIE-NSM-IRPI achieved the same detection rate and median number of sentinel lymph nodes as C-NSM-IRPI (3.00vs. 4.00, P = 0.780). The incidence of prosthesis removal due to infection or prosthesis exposure in the SIE-NSM-IRPI group was lower than that in the C-NSM-IRPI group (P = 0.015). Satisfaction with breasts (82.00vs.59.00, P < 0.001), psychosocial well-being (93.00vs.77.00, P = 0.001) and physical well-being (chest) (89.00vs.82.00, P < 0.001) scores were higher in the SIE-NSM-IRPI group. There were no significant differences between the two groups in disease-free survival (hazard ratio = 0.829, 95% confidence interval = 0.182-3.779) and overall survival (hazard ratio = 1.919, 95% confidence interval = 0.169-21.842).
In this selected cohort of patients with early breast cancer, SIE-NSM-IRPI was comparable to C-NSM-IRPI, considering oncologic safety and detection of sentinel lymph nodes. It had a lower incidence of prosthesis removal, shorter incision length, and was associated with better patient satisfaction with the breasts. More random clinical trials of this novel approach in a larger cohort of Chinese patients with an extended follow-up period are needed in the future.
本研究比较了经乳晕单孔入路内镜辅助保留乳头皮下乳房切除术联合即刻假体植入乳房重建(SIE-NSM-IRPI)与传统乳晕-乳头保留皮下乳房切除术联合即刻假体植入乳房重建(C-NSM-IRPI)的围手术期结果、美学效果和肿瘤安全性。
本回顾性队列研究纳入了 64 例早期乳腺癌患者,分为 SIE-NSM-IRPI 组(n=38)和 C-NSM-IRPI 组(n=26)。比较两组患者的围手术期结果(手术时间、术中出血量、切口长度、引流时间和近期并发症)。根据 BREAST-Q 量表分析两组患者乳房满意度、社会心理幸福感、胸部生理幸福感和性生活幸福感的差异,并比较生存结局。
中位随访时间为 51.5 个月。SIE-NSM-IRPI 的切口长度短于 C-NSM-IRPI(P<0.001)。SIE-NSM-IRPI 与 C-NSM-IRPI 检测到的前哨淋巴结数量相同(3.00vs.4.00,P=0.780)。SIE-NSM-IRPI 组因感染或假体外露而取出假体的发生率低于 C-NSM-IRPI 组(P=0.015)。SIE-NSM-IRPI 组患者乳房满意度(82.00vs.59.00,P<0.001)、社会心理幸福感(93.00vs.77.00,P=0.001)和胸部生理幸福感(89.00vs.82.00,P<0.001)评分均高于 C-NSM-IRPI 组。两组患者无病生存率(风险比=0.829,95%置信区间=0.182-3.779)和总生存率(风险比=1.919,95%置信区间=0.169-21.842)无显著差异。
在本研究中,在考虑肿瘤安全性和前哨淋巴结检测的情况下,SIE-NSM-IRPI 在早期乳腺癌患者中的应用与 C-NSM-IRPI 相当。SIE-NSM-IRPI 组假体取出率较低,切口较短,患者对乳房的满意度更高。未来需要在更大的中国患者队列中进行更多的随机临床试验,以延长随访时间。