Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Oct;30(11):6488-6496.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-023-13726-7. Epub 2023 Jun 30.

Intraoperative Examination of Retro-Areolar Margin is not Routinely Necessary During Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Cancer

Affiliations

Intraoperative Examination of Retro-Areolar Margin is not Routinely Necessary During Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy for Cancer

Francesca Serio et al. Ann Surg Oncol. 2023 Oct.

Abstract

Background: Intraoperative examination of retro-areolar margin (IERM) often is used during nipple-sparing mastectomy (NSM) for cancer, but there is no robust data regarding its real advantage.

Methods: Consecutive patients undergoing NSM for cancer with omission of IERM according to institutional protocols from 2016 to 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. The decision to maintain or remove the Nipple-Areola Complex (NAC) after definitive pathology was taken at the multidisciplinary meeting.

Results: Among 162 women operated in the study period, the presence of neoplastic cells within 2 mm from the inked retroareolar margin (RAM) was detected at permanent pathology in 17 cases (10.5%). Nipple-Areola-Complex (NAC) was removed postoperatively in five patients (3%) for margins <1 mm, the other 12 were observed, whereas postoperative NAC necrosis required surgical removal in additional five cases (3%). The NAC was thus preserved in 152 of 162 patients (94%). At multivariate analysis, RAM ≤2 mm was associated with radiological tumor-to-nipple distance less than or equal to 1 cm (p = 0.04) and Ki67 label index ≥ 20 (p = 0.04), whereas multifocality/multicentricity showed a trend towards significance (p = 0.07). At a median follow-up of 46 months, five locoregional relapses occurred (3%), only one of them involving the NAC (0, 6%). Locoregional relapse and overall survival for patients with RAM > or < 2 mm were not different.

Conclusions: IERM is not routinely necessary during NSM for cancer, because its omission is associated with a very low return to the operating room, it is oncologically safe, and associated pitfalls are avoided. Further studies are necessary to confirm these findings.

Keywords: Breast cancer; Intra-operative examination; Nipple sparing; Retro-areolar margin.

PubMed Disclaimer

Comment in

References

    1. Elmore LC, Dietz JR, Myckatyn TM, Margenthaler JA. The landmark series: mastectomy trials (skin-sparing and nipple-sparing and reconstruction landmark trials). Ann Surg Oncol. 2021;28:273–80. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Benediktsson KP, Perbeck L. Survival in breast cancer after nipple-sparing subcutaneous mastectomy and immediate reconstruction with implants: a prospective trial with 13 years median follow-up in 216 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34(2):143–8. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sakurai T, Zhang N, Suzuma T, et al. Long-term follow-up of nipple-sparing mastectomy without radiotherapy: a single center study at a Japanese institution. Med Oncol. 2013;30(1):481. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Lanitis S, Tekkis PP, Sgourakis G, et al. Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast cancer: A meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;251:632–9. - DOI
    1. Galimberti V, Morigi C, Bagnardi V, et al. Oncological outcomes of nipple-sparing mastectomy: a single-center experience of 1989 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(13):3849–57. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources