Skip to main content
Log in

Update operative Therapie des Mammakarzinoms

Wie viel muss sein?

Update on operative therapy of breast cancer

How much is necessary?

  • CME Zertifizierte Fortbildung
  • Published:
Der Gynäkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die operative Therapie des Mammakarzinoms hat sich entscheidend weiterentwickelt, vor allem geprägt durch reduzierte lokale Radikalität. Mehrstufige Therapiekonzepte ermöglichen, die Operation nicht zwangsläufig am Beginn der Therapie durchführen zu müssen. Die radikale Mastektomie nach Halsted war lange der operative Standard beim Mammakarzinom. Mittlerweile werden bis zu 70–80 % aller Patientinnen brusterhaltend operiert. Obwohl diese Therapie seit Jahrzehnten präferiert wird, gibt es nach wie vor keinen endgültigen Konsens über adäquate Resektionsränder. Die Strategie der axillären Lymphknotenentfernung hat sich ebenfalls gewandelt. Wurde bis vor wenigen Jahren grundsätzlich noch eine komplette Axilladissektion gefordert, so empfiehlt die Datenlage bei brusterhaltender Therapie heute, den Verzicht selbst bei positivem Sentinel-node-Status. Neoadjuvante Therapiekonzepte gestatten ggf. eine weitere Steigerung der Brusterhaltung. Für andere Fälle sind alle rekonstruktiven Möglichkeiten zu prüfen, wenn eine Mastektomie indiziert ist.

Abstract

Operative therapy of breast cancer has undergone decisive further development especially in the reduction of local radicality. Multistage therapy concepts mean that operations must not necessarily be carried out at the initiation of therapy. Radical mastectomy according to Halsted was the operative standard for breast cancer for a long time but nowadays, up to 70–80 % of patients receive breast-conserving surgery. Although this therapy has been preferred for decades, there is no final consensus on adequate resection margins. The strategy of axillary lymph node resection has also changed. Only a few years ago a complete axillary dissection was basically deemed necessary but nowadays, the available data on breast-conserving therapy do not recommend this, even in the case of positive sentinel node status. Neoadjuvant therapy concepts allow when necessary a further increase in breast-conservation. In other cases all reconstructive possibilities should be checked if mastectomy is indicated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Abbreviations

ALD:

axilläre Lymphdissektion

ALNE:

axilläre Lymphonodektomie

BET:

brusterhaltende Therapie

DCIS:

duktales Carcinoma in situ

DIEP:

deep inferior epigastric artery perforator

FNR:

Falsch-negativ-Rate

I-GAP:

inferior gluteal artery perforator

MAK:

Mammillen-Areola-Komplex

ME:

Mastektomie

MRM:

modifizierte radikale Mastektomie

NSM:

Nipple-sparing-Mastektomie

PST:

primär systemische Therapie

SNB:

Sentinel-node-Biopsie

SSM:

Skin-sparing-Mastektomie

TRAM:

transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneus

Literatur

  1. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L et al (2002) Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 347(16):1227–1232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Wöckel A, Wolters R, Wiegel T et al (2014) The impact of adjuvant radiotherapy on the survival of primary breast cancer patients: a retrospective multicenter cohort study of 8935 subjects. Ann Oncol 25(3):628–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Luini A, Rsoschansky J, Gatti G et al (2009) The surgical margin status after breast conserving surgery: discussion of an open issue. Breast Cancer Res Treat 113(2):397–402

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML et al (2010) Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer 46(18):3219–3232

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Morrow M (2008) Margins in breast-conserving therapy: have we lost sight of the big picture? Expert Rev Anticancer Ther 8(8):1193–1196

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Morrow M (2009) Breast conservation and negative margins: how much is enough? Breast

  7. Fisher B, Anderson S, Redmonk CK et al (1995) Reanalysis and results after 12 years of follow-up in a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy with lumpectomy with or without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 333(22):1456–1461

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M et al (2009) Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 27:1615–1620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lanitis S, Tekkis PP, Sgourakis G et al (2010) Comparison of skin-sparing mastectomy versus non-skin-sparing mastectomy for breast a meta-analysis of observational studies. Ann Surg 251(4):632–639. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181d35bf8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Gerber B, Krause A, Dieterich M et al (2009) The oncological safety of skin sparing mastectomy with conservation of the nipple-areola complex and autologous reconstruction: an extended follow-up study. Ann Surg 249(3):461–468. doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e31819a044f

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Dieterich M, Farid A (2013) Biological matrices and synthetic meshes used in implant-based breast reconstruction – a review of products available in Germany. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 73(11):1100–1106

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Sullivan SR, Fletcher DR, Isom CD, Isik FF (2008) True incidence of all complications following immediate and delayed breast reconstruction. Plas Reconstr Surg 122(1):19–28. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181774267

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Marques M, Browen SA, Oliveira I et al (2010) Long-term follow-up of breast capsule contracture rates in cosmetic and reconstructive cases. Plas Reconstr Surg 126(3):769–778. doi:10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181e5f7bf

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. McLaughlin JK, Lipworth L, Murphy DK, Walker PS (2007) The safety of silicone gel-filled breast implants: a review of the epidemiologic evidence. Ann Plast Surg 59(5):569–580

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G et al (2003) A randomized comparison of sentinel node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 349:546–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P et al (2010) Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg 252(3):426–432

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T et al (2013) Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective multi-center cohort study. Lancet Oncol 14(7):609–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA et al (2013) Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA 310(14):1455–1461

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Einhaltung ethischer Richtlinien

Interessenkonflikt. V. Fink, L. Schwentner und W. Janni geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht. Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to V. Fink.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fink, V., Schwentner, L. & Janni, W. Update operative Therapie des Mammakarzinoms. Gynäkologe 47, 667–676 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-014-3446-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-014-3446-5

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Navigation