REVIEW | doi:10.20944/preprints202308.1866.v1
Subject: Medicine And Pharmacology, Surgery Keywords: breast reconstruction; reconstruction following mastectomy; prophylactic mastectomy; chest feminization; transgender; implant reconstruction of breast; immediate reconstruction; delayed reconstruction; two-stage breast reconstruction; autologous breast reconstruction
Online: 29 August 2023 (03:19:28 CEST)
(1) Importance of problem: Breast cancer accounted for 685.000 deaths globally in 2020, and half of all cases occur in women with no specific risk factor beside gender and age-group. During last 4 decades we see a reduction by 40% of age-standardized breast cancer , which in turn means that the number of mastectomies performed for younger women increased, raising the need for adequate breast reconstructive surgery. Advances in oncological treatment have made it possible to limit the extent of what represents radical surgery for breast cancer, yet in the past decade, we see a marked trend toward mastectomy in breast conserving surgery eligible patients . Prophylactic mastectomy has also registered an upward trend [3,4]. This trend together with new indication for breast reconstruction like chest feminization in transgender patients  have increased the need for breast reconstruction surgery. (2) Purpose: The purpose of this study is to analyze the types of reconstructive procedures, their indications, their limitations, their functional results and the safety profiles when used during the integrated treatment plan of the oncologic patient; (3) Methods: We conducted an extensive literature review of the main reconstructive techniques, especially the autologous procedures, summarized the findings and presented a few cases from our own experience for exemplification of the usage of breast reconstruction in oncologic patients. (4) Conclusions: Breast reconstruction has become a necessary step in the treatment of most breast cancers and many reconstructive techniques are now routinely practiced. Microsurgical techniques are considered the "gold standard", but they are not accessible to all services, from a technical or financial point of view, so pediculated flaps remain the safe and reliable option, along with alloplastic procedures, to improve the quality of life of these patients.
Subject: Medicine And Pharmacology, Immunology And Allergy Keywords: germline testing; NGS; breast cancer; genetic counselling; risk assessment
Online: 7 July 2021 (13:14:58 CEST)
The use of multi-gene panels for germline testing in breast cancer enables the estimation of cancer risk and guides risk-reducing management options for tested individuals and their family members. We performed an analysis in our clinical database to identify breast cancer patients undergoing genetic testing with positive reports. We reviewed positive results with respect to the different levels of information provided in the reports; risk estimation and management, cascade family testing, information from secondary findings and actionable information for treatment decision-making. A total of 415 positive test reports were identified with 57.1%, 18.1%, 10.8% and 13.5% of individuals having pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants in high (BRCA1, BRCA2, PALB2, PTEN, TP53), moderate (ATM, CHEK2, NBN), low (BARD1, BRIP1, CHEK2, MLH1, MSH2, MSH6, NF1, RAD51C) and with insufficient evidence for breast cancer risk genes (FANCA, FANCM, NBN, MRE11, PMS2, RAD50, RAD51B, XRCC2, MUTYH), respectively. 6.7% of individuals were double heterozygotes with two pathogenic variants. Germline findings in 92% of individuals are linked to evidence-based treatment information and receive risk estimates for predisposition to breast and/or other cancer types. The use of germline findings for treatment decision making expands the indication of genetic testing to include individuals that could benefit from targeted treatments.