Chest wall resection for breast cancer: 21st century Mayo clinic experience.

BACKGROUND: We hypothesized full-thickness chest wall resection (FTCWR) with advanced surgical techniques and modern systemic therapy is safe, provides local control, and good overall survival. METHODS: Retrospective review of FTCWR (including rib or part of sternum) for breast cancer between 2000 and 2020. Primary endpoints included 90-day morbidities and all-cause mortality. Secondary endpoints were loco-regional and distant recurrence, DFS and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 35 patients met the criteria. 34 FTCWR were for recurrence and the median time to chest wall recurrence was 6 years. Tumor subtype was triple-negative in 51% and the remainder HR+ Her2-. 58% were palliative resections. FTCWR included rib(s) in 89% and portion of sternum in 57%; 94% required reconstruction and 80% were R0 resections. There were no 90-day mortalities. Overall morbidity was 10/35(28%). 17(49%) patients received neoadjuvant systemic therapy for their recurrence and three received neoadjuvant radiation. Adjuvant treatment included chemotherapy (8), endocrine therapy (3), and both (8). Ten patients (28%) received adjuvant radiation. The Median follow-up was 31 months and there were 6 (17%) loco-regional and 7 (20%) distant recurrences. OS was 86% and 67% at 1 and 3 years, respectively. CONCLUSION: FTCWR was associated with low morbidity, mortality, recurrence rates, and good OS. Selective FTCWR is safe and has acceptable short-term survival rates.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Breast Cancer Stage at Diagnosis, Presentation, and Patient Management.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic caused delays in breast cancer management forcing clinicians to potentially alter treatment recommendations. This study compared breast cancer stage at diagnosis and rates of neoadjuvant therapy among women presenting to our institution before and during COVID-19. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of patients with a new breast cancer diagnosis from March 2020-August 2020 (during-COVID-19) were compared with March 2019-August 2019 (pre-COVID-19). We compared stage at diagnosis, clinical/demographic features, and neoadjuvant therapy use between the time periods. RESULTS: A total of 573 patients included: 376 pre-COVID-19, 197 during-COVID-19. Method of cancer detection was by imaging in 66% versus 63% and by physical findings/symptoms in 34% versus 37% of patients comparing pre-COVID-19 to during-COVID-19, p = 0.47. Overall clinical prognostic stage did not differ significantly (p = 0.39) between the time periods, nor did cM1 disease (2% in each period); 23% pre-COVID-19 and 27% during-COVID-19 presented with cN+ disease (p = 0.38). Neoadjuvant therapy use was significantly higher during-COVID-19 (39%) versus pre-COVID-19 (29%, p = 0.02) driven by increased neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET) use (7% to 16%, p = 0.002), whereas neoadjuvant chemotherapy use did not change (22% vs. 23%, p = 0.72). In HR+/HER2- disease, NET use increased from 10% pre-COVID-19 to 23% during-COVID-19 (p = 0.001) with a significant increase in stage I patients (7 to 22%, p < 0.001) and nonsignificant increases in stage II (18 to 23%, p = 0.63) and stage III (9 to 29%, p = 0.29). CONCLUSIONS: Breast cancer stage at diagnosis did not differ significantly during-COVID-19 compared with pre-COVID-19. More patients during-COVID-19 were treated with NET, which was significantly increased in stage I HR+/HER2- disease.

Decreasing the Use of Sentinel Lymph Node Surgery in Women Older than 70 Years with Hormone Receptor-Positive Breast Cancer and the Impact on Adjuvant Radiation and Hormonal Therapy.

BACKGROUND: In 2016, SSO Choosing Wisely guidelines recommended against routine sentinel lymph node (SLN) surgery in women ≥ 70 with HR+ cN0 breast cancer. Following this, we identified a group of women at low-risk of nodal positivity where SLN may be omitted (grade 1, cT1mi-T1c, or grade 2, cT1mi-T1b). This study evaluates the impact of these changes on our practice. METHODS: Retrospective chart review of women aged ≥ 70 years with HR+ cN0 breast cancer at our institution from 2010 to 2020. We compared SLN use before (2010-2016)/after (2017-2020) guideline release according to clinical risk and the association with adjuvant therapy. RESULTS: A total of 1015 breast cancers in 987 women identified. SLN surgery rate significantly decreased from 90.6% (2010-2016) to 62.8% in 2020 (p < 0.001). This was driven by breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with SLN rates of 88.2% (2010-2016) and 46.7% in 2020. During 2017-2020, SLN use varied by risk within BCS patients: 52.2% low-risk, 81.9% higher-risk, p < 0.001. In contrast, in mastectomy patients SLN was performed in ≥ 98% regardless of risk level. SLN positivity was 13.4% overall: 7.4% in low-risk and 20.8% in higher-risk, p < 0.001. After adjusting for age and clinical risk, SLN use was not associated with adjuvant radiation [odds ratio (OR) 1.61, p = 0.11] or endocrine therapy (OR 1.12, p = 0.71). CONCLUSIONS: The Society of Surgical Oncology guideline release, followed by implementation of a clinical tool to stratify by nodal risk, was associated with decreased SLN use in women aged ≥ 70 years, in those with clinically low-risk HR+ disease surgically treated with BCS. Adjusting for confounders, omission of SLN surgery was not associated with use of subsequent adjuvant radiation or hormonal therapy.

High-output chyle leak after breast-conserving surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy.

Postoperative chyle leak is an exceedingly rare complication following breast and axillary surgery. We present the first described case of chyle leak following breast-conserving surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Management should begin with appropriated conservative measures aimed at reduction of lymph production and flow. Intervention is warranted when conservative strategies fail and include sclerotherapy, lymphangiography, embolization, and surgery. Breast surgeons should be mindful of this potential complication when operating in the axilla and be familiar with its stepwise management.

Acute mental disorders and short and long term morbidity in patients with third degree flame burn: A population-based outcome study of 96,451 patients from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) database (2001-2011).

BACKGROUND: Although burn patients with preexisting mood disorders have been shown to have diminished clinical recovery, acute mental disorders (AMD) are often unrecognized despite a link with post-traumatic stress disorder and social maladjustment later on. This study assessed the clinical profile of a large cohort of burn patients who developed AMD compared to those with chronic mental illness (CMI) and those without mental health problems to assess the impact of AMI on burn outcomes. METHODS: Admission data on 96,451 patients with third degree flame burns was abstracted from the Nationwide Inpatient Sample (NIS) Database from 2001 to 2011. AMD was defined as adjustment disorder (ICD-10 codes F43.2-F43.29) and acute stress disorder (F43.0), while CMI was defined as major depressive disorder (F33.0-F33.9) and bipolar disorder (F31.0-F31.9). Data was compared across three subgroups: AMD, CMI, and patients without any mood disorders. Categorical variables were compared using the Chi-square test, and continuous variables were compared using Student t-test and analysis of variance (ANOVA). Multivariate analysis using the "backward Wald" method was performed to calculate odds ratios (OR) and determine independent factors which increased the risk of developing AMD after burn. RESULTS: 979 (1%) burn patients were diagnosed with AMD, compared to 5971 (6.2%) with CMI and 89,501 (92.8%) without mood disorders at the time of the burn. Patients with AMD were significantly younger, predominantly male and Caucasian. Patients with AMD had a higher frequency of multiple third-degree burn sites. AMD patients had a significantly longer length of hospitalization and shorter actuarial survival. More AMD patients lacked social or family support, suffered from alcoholism or illicit drug abuse, and had a history of psychological trauma or self-inflicted injuries compared to other groups. After burn, 4.9% of AMD patients developed burn wound infections, 5.0% had nutritional deficiencies, 1.7% had skin graft failure, 0.7% had acute psychosis, and 3.7% had suicidal ideation, p<0.05. Multivariate analysis identified age 10-39 (OR 4.6), alcoholism (OR 1.4), drug abuse (OR 1.9), psychoses (OR 1.4), and total body surface are (TBSA) 10-39% third degree burns (OR 1.8) as independently associated with developing AMD, p<0.005. CONCLUSION: The development of AMD in burn patients is associated with poor clinical outcomes including longer hospitalization, decreased survival, and increased complication rates. Premorbid psychopathology, substance abuse and age were associated with a higher incidence AMD after burn than was the severity of the burn wound itself. Routine screening for psychological symptoms of AMD should be performed in all burn patients to avoid increased rates of short and long-term morbidity and mortality.