RESUMO
Purpose@#Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become a standard axillary staging surgery for early breast cancer, and the proportion of patients requiring axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is decreasing. We aimed to evaluate the association between the number of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) retrieved and the risk of lymphedema of the ipsilateral arm. @*Methods@#Prospectively collected medical records of 910 patients were reviewed.Lymphedema was defined as a difference in circumference > 2 cm compared to the contralateral arm and/or having clinical records of lymphedema treatment in the rehabilitation clinic. @*Results@#Together with an objective and subjective assessment of lymphedema, 36 patients (6.1%) had lymphedema in the SLNB group and 85 patients (27.0%) had lymphedema in the ALND group (p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis of the whole cohort, risk factors significantly associated risk with the development of lymphedema were body mass index, mastectomy (vs.breast-conserving surgery), ALND, and radiation therapy. In logistic regression models in the SLNB group only, there was no correlation between the number of retrieved SLNs and the incidence of lymphedema. In addition, in the Pearson correlation analysis, no correlation was observed between the number of retrieved SLNs and the difference in circumference between the ipsilateral and contralateral upper extremities (correlation coefficients = 0.067, p = 0.111). @*Conclusion@#The risk of lymphedema in breast cancer surgery and adjuvant treatments is multifactorial. The number of retrieved lymph nodes during sentinel biopsy was not associated with the incidence of lymphedema.
RESUMO
Purpose@#Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become a standard axillary staging surgery for early breast cancer, and the proportion of patients requiring axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is decreasing. We aimed to evaluate the association between the number of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) retrieved and the risk of lymphedema of the ipsilateral arm. @*Methods@#Prospectively collected medical records of 910 patients were reviewed.Lymphedema was defined as a difference in circumference > 2 cm compared to the contralateral arm and/or having clinical records of lymphedema treatment in the rehabilitation clinic. @*Results@#Together with an objective and subjective assessment of lymphedema, 36 patients (6.1%) had lymphedema in the SLNB group and 85 patients (27.0%) had lymphedema in the ALND group (p < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis of the whole cohort, risk factors significantly associated risk with the development of lymphedema were body mass index, mastectomy (vs.breast-conserving surgery), ALND, and radiation therapy. In logistic regression models in the SLNB group only, there was no correlation between the number of retrieved SLNs and the incidence of lymphedema. In addition, in the Pearson correlation analysis, no correlation was observed between the number of retrieved SLNs and the difference in circumference between the ipsilateral and contralateral upper extremities (correlation coefficients = 0.067, p = 0.111). @*Conclusion@#The risk of lymphedema in breast cancer surgery and adjuvant treatments is multifactorial. The number of retrieved lymph nodes during sentinel biopsy was not associated with the incidence of lymphedema.
RESUMO
PURPOSE@#The oncologic safety of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been demonstrated. However, the outcome of IBR for locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is still under debate. We compared the survival outcome of LABC patients who underwent IBR vs. mastectomy alone.@*METHODS@#We retrospectively analyzed a total of 248 patients with stage III breast cancer who were treated with mastectomy between 2004 and 2015. The study subjects were divided into 2 groups: patients who received IBR (n=77) or mastectomy alone (MA) (n=171). We compared disease-free survival (DFS) of both groups.@*RESULTS@#Median follow-up duration was 49 months and the mean age of patients was 49 years. Patients in the IBR group were significantly younger and had lower body mass index (BMI) than those in the MA group. In a univariate analysis, IBR group showed better DFS than the MA group (DFS 81.3 months vs. 49.8 months, p<0.001). There was no delay in adjuvant treatment in the IBR group. In a multivariate analysis, IBR was associated with better DFS (hazard ratio (HR) for recurrence: 0.37, 95% CI 0.20–0.69, p=0.002) when adjusted for potential prognostic factors. In a subgroup analysis performed according to disease stage (IIIA and IIIB/IIIC), DFS was significantly better in IBR than MA group in both stage subgroups (p<0.001).@*CONCLUSION@#We demonstrated that patients who underwent IBR showed better DFS outcome compared with patients who underwent mastectomy alone. Our results can help surgeons to determine if IBR is an option in patients with LABC.