Ethical Considerations of Medical Photography in the Management of Breast Disease.

BACKGROUND: Medical photography has become an important component of the evaluation and management of patients across many specialties. It is increasingly utilized in contemporary practice with modern smartphones and enhanced digital media. Photography can enhance and improve treatment plans and communication between providers and patients. Additionally, photography supplements education, research, and marketing in both print and social media. Ethical and medicolegal standards for medical photography, specifically for patients with breast disease, have not been formally developed to guide medical providers. PURPOSE: To provide guidelines for breast care physicians using medical photography, the Ethics Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons presents an updated review of the literature and recommendations for ethical and practical use of photography in patient care. METHODS: An extensive PubMed review of articles in English was performed to identify studies and articles published prior to 2018 investigating the use of medical photography in patient care and the ethics of medical photography. After review of the literature, members of the Ethics Committee convened a panel discussion to identify best practices for the use of medical photography in the breast care setting. Results of the literature and panel discussion were then incorporated to provide the content of this article. CONCLUSION: The Ethics Committee of the American Society of Breast Surgeons acknowledges that photography of the breast has become an invaluable tool in the delivery of state-of-the-art care to our patients with breast disease, and we encourage the use of this important medium. Physicians must be well informed regarding the concerns associated with medical photography of the breast to optimize its safe and ethical use in clinical practice.

The Ethics of Breast Surgery.

Breast surgery has evolved as a subspecialty of general surgery and requires a working knowledge of benign and malignant diseases, surgical techniques, shared decision-making with patients, collaboration with a multi-disciplinary team, and a basic foundation in surgical ethics. Ethics is defined as the practice of analyzing, evaluating, and promoting best conduct based upon available standards. As new information is obtained or as cultural values change, best conduct may be re-defined. In 2014, the Ethics Committee of the ASBrS acknowledged numerous ethical issues, specific to the practice of breast surgery. This independent review of ethical concerns was created by the Ethics Committee to provide a resource for ASBrS members as well as other surgeons who perform breast surgery. In this review, the professional, clinical, research and technology considerations that breast surgeons face are reviewed with guidelines for ethical physician behavior.

Discordance between pathologic and radiologic tumor size on breast MRI may contribute to increased re-excision rates.

Preoperative breast MRI does not decrease re-excision rates in patients who undergo lumpectomy. We evaluated concordance of tumor size on MRI and pathologic size in patients who underwent re-excision of margins after lumpectomy. A retrospective review of patients at the Cedars-Sinai Breast Center who received breast MRI was performed. We found that MRI was performed before lumpectomy in 136 patients. Mean age was 55.2 years (standard deviation ± 12.6). Re-excision occurred in 34 per cent (n = 46). Of those undergoing re-excision, 35 per cent (16/46) were re-excised for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at the lumpectomy margin. There was no significant difference between radiologic and pathologic size of the tumor (1.94 vs 2.12 cm; P = 0.159). In those who underwent re-excision, the radiologic size was underestimated compared with the pathologic size (2.01 vs 2.66 cm; P = 0.032). Patients with pure DCIS lesions (n = 9) also had smaller radiologic tumor size compared with pathologic (0.64 vs 2.88 cm; P = 0.039), and this difference trended toward significance in those who underwent re-excision (0.55 vs 3.50 cm; P = 0.059). Discordance between tumor size on MRI and pathologic size may contribute to re-excisions in patients who undergo lumpectomy. The limitations of breast MRI to evaluate the extent of DCIS surrounding many breast cancers, and the impact on re-excision rates, should be further evaluated.

Breast MRI after bilateral mastectomy: is it indicated?

Little is known about the use of breast MRI as a diagnostic or surveillance tool in patients after bilateral mastectomy. The objective of this study was to evaluate breast MRI after bilateral mastectomy. Participants consisted of 48 women with prior bilateral mastectomy who underwent breast MRI between 2003 and 2009. Seventy-nine breast MRIs were obtained. The median time between mastectomy and first MRI was 36 months. MRI was ordered most often by a medical oncologist (71%). Median age at bilateral mastectomy was 49 years (range, 33 to 72 years). Reasons for obtaining MRI included surveillance in 60 (76%), mass in eight (10%), lymph nodes in four (5%), pain in three (4%), and abscess in one (1%). Overall, 68 (86%) MRIs showed benign imaging findings only. Within the surveillance group, six patients had MRIs with findings that changed management; four patients had some residual breast tissue, and two patients had findings outside the breast that were better evaluated by CT or bone scan and were ultimately benign. MRI confirmed locoregional recurrence in two patients with highly suspicious physical findings. Overall, postmastectomy breast MRI had limited use, finding no unsuspected recurrences within our study group. Although MRI can be helpful to establish the presence of residual breast tissue after bilateral mastectomy, subsequent routine screening breast MRI should be questioned if no residual breast tissue is identified.

Effect of bone mineral density and parathyroidectomy on fracture risk in primary hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Bone mineral density is one parameter used to decide whether patients with primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT) should undergo parathyroidectomy. However, the influence of bone mineral density and parathyroidectomy on subsequent fracture risk is unclear. METHODS: The authors conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients with PHPT based on administrative discharge abstract data. The dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scan T-scores at the femur were collected by chart review, and 10-year fracture-free survival (FFS) was the main outcome measured. RESULTS: A total of 533 patients were identified, most of them > or = 50 years old (89%) and female (87%). Seventeen percent of the patients were black. Mean initial calcium, parathormone, and creatinine levels were 11.1 mg/dl, 116 pg/ml, and 0.9 mg/dl, respectively. Parathyroidectomy was performed in 159 (30%) patients, and 374 (70%) were observed. The 10-year FFS after PHPT diagnosis was 94% in patients treated with parathyroidectomy and 81% in those observed (p = 0.006). Compared to observation, parathyroidectomy improved the 10-year FFS by 9.1% (p = 0.99), 12% (p = 0.92), and 12% (p = 0.02) in patients with normal bones (T-score > or = -1.0), osteopenia (T-score < or = -1.0, > or = -2.5), and osteoporosis (T-score < -2.5), respectively. On multivariate analysis, parathyroidectomy was independently associated with decreased fracture risk (HR = 0.41; 95%CI 0.18, 0.93), whereas non-black race (HR = 2.94; 95%CI 1.04, 8.30) and T-score < -2.5 (HR = 2.29; 95%CI 1.08, 4.88) remained independently associated with increased fracture risk. CONCLUSIONS: Parathyroidectomy decreases the risk of fracture in patients with normal, osteopenic, and osteoporotic bones. The largest impact from parathyroidectomy is in patients with osteoporosis. The highest risk of fracture is in non-blacks and in patients with osteoporosis.

The effect of parathyroidectomy on bone fracture risk in patients with primary hyperparathyroidism.

BACKGROUND: Parathyroidectomy may increase bone density in primary hyperparathyroidism (PHPT), but it is unclear whether fracture risk is decreased. HYPOTHESIS: Parathyroidectomy decreases fracture risk. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study with median follow-up of 6.5 years. SETTING: Twelve regional hospitals in California. PATIENTS: One thousand five hundred sixty-nine patients with PHPT. INTERVENTIONS: Parathyroidectomy or observation. Main Outcome Measure Fracture-free survival. RESULTS: Mean initial calcium, parathyroid hormone, and creatinine levels were 11.2 mg/dL (2.8 mmol/L), 123.0 pg/mL, and 0.9 mg/dL (79.6 micromol/L), respectively. Parathyroidectomy was performed in 452 (28.8%) patients, and 1117 (71.2%) were observed. The 10-year fracture-free survival after PHPT diagnosis was 73% in patients treated with parathyroidectomy compared with 59% in those observed (hazard ratio [HR], 0.53; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38-0.73; P < .001). Parathyroidectomy decreased the 10-year hip fracture rate by 8% (P = .001) and the upper extremity fracture rate by 3% (P = .02). Parathyroidectomy was independently associated with a decreased fracture risk (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.47-0.98), whereas female sex (HR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.19-2.80) and increased creatinine level (HR per 1-mg/dL [88.4-micromol/L] increment, 2.05; 95% CI, 1.22-3.46) remained independently associated with an increased fracture risk. Age of 50 years or older (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 0.99-2.66), initial parathyroid hormone level (HR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.99-1.02), and calcium level (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.75-1.37) were not independently associated with fracture risk after adjusting for all other variables. CONCLUSIONS: Parathyroidectomy is associated with a decreased risk of fracture in PHPT. The largest decrease was in hip fractures. Parathyroidectomy should be considered for all patients with PHPT to reduce fracture risk, regardless of age or calcium or parathyroid hormone levels.

Surgical approach to the patient with familial hyperparathyroidism.

Familial hyperparathyroidism encompasses the diagnoses of multiple endocrine neoplasia (MEN) type 1, MEN type 2A, and familial isolated primary hyperparathyroidism. All patients should undergo bilateral neck exploration and identification of all four or more parathyroid glands to evaluate for gross abnormalities. MEN-1 patients should have subtotal parathyroidectomy and cervical thymectomy because this operation achieves an appropriate balance between optimizing the potential for cure yet minimizing the risk of permanent hypocalcemia. However, MEN-2A patients may best be treated by selective resection of abnormal parathyroid glands, although some experts recommend a total parathyroidectomy and autotransplantation in the forearm. Familial isolated hyperparathyroidism is a rare disorder, and authors have described success in treatment with subtotal parathyroidectomy or limited adenoma resections. Some patients with familial isolated hyperparathyroidism also have jaw tumors, and members of these families are more likely to have parathyroid carcinoma. Concurrent cryopreservation of parathyroid tissue for all of these disorders is recommended if there is any concern for possible permanent hypoparathyroidism.