With so much to think about after a breast cancer diagnosis, many patients facing mastectomy do not fully understand how the timing of breast reconstruction influences how the reconstructed breasts will ultimately look.
Breast reconstruction can be performed at the same time as the mastectomy ("immediate reconstruction") or a while after mastectomy ("delayed reconstruction").
When the mastectomy and reconstruction are performed at the same time, a skin-sparing mastectomy can usually be performed which saves the majority of the natural breast skin envelope (except for the nipple and areola). Only the actual breast tissue under the skin is removed. The reconstruction then "fills" this empty skin envelope. In some select cases nipple-sparing mastectomy can be performed. This preserves the nipple and areola as well as the breast skin.
Skin-sparing (or nipple-sparing) mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction produce the most "natural" results with the least scarring. Skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate reconstruction is therefore preferred whenever possible and should be the goal for breast cancer patients with early disease (stage I or II).
Delayed reconstruction unfortunately leaves more scarring (typically) and the final breast is less likely to look like the breasts Mother Nature provided. Common reasons to delay reconstruction include advanced breast cancer (stage III or IV), inflammatory breast cancer, the plan for radiation therapy after mastectomy, and lack of access to a reconstructive surgeon.
The difference in scarring between immediate and delayed breast reconstruction can be seen in these breast reconstruction before and after photos.
Ultimately the priority must always be "life before breast" - obviously the breast cancer treatment comes first in terms of priority. However, all other things being equal, there will sometimes be a choice to be made between having the reconstruction performed with the mastectomy or some time after the mastectomy. Whenever possible, I encourage women to seek immediate reconstruction for the best cosmetic results.
*****
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in the latest breast reconstruction techniques including the DIEP flap procedure. He and his partners perform over 500 DIEP flap procedures per year and are In-Network for most US insurance plans. Learn more about your breast reconstruction options and connect with other breast reconstruction patients here. You can also follow Dr C on Twitter!
*****
Showing posts with label radiation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label radiation. Show all posts
Monday, October 18, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Are you a DIEP Flap candidate?
The DIEP flap procedure has rapidly become the "gold standard" in breast reconstruction today. While not every woman is a candidate for DIEP flap surgery, many are turned away when in fact they needn't be. The most common areas of confusion include:
1) Previous Abdominal Surgery
While some types of previous abdominal surgery can make the DIEP flap procedure impossible to perform, most of the time previous abdominal surgery really isn't an issue.
Many women these days have had a previous c-section or hysterectomy. It is possible for these procedures to cause damage to the blood vessels needed for DIEP flap surgery, but this is rare. A previous c-section, hysterectomy, or tubal ligation is not a contra-indication to having the procedure.
If your surgeon is worried about potential damage from previous surgery then certain tests can be performed to examine the anatomy more closely. This can include a simple doppler ultrasound exam in the office or a more involved test like a CT angiogram.
So which previous surgeries DO cause a problem? Women that have had a previous TRAM flap, tummy tuck or very extensive abdominal wall surgeries (like complex repairs of huge hernias) cannot have a DIEP or SIEA flap reconstruction because the lower tummy tissue that is needed has already been removed, disconnected or moved around.
While previous abdominal surgeries may not prevent DIEP flap reconstruction, women that have had multiple previous abdominal procedures are at increased risk of abdominal complications like bulging and even hernia after DIEP flap surgery when compared to women that have never had prior abdominal surgery.
2) An Umbilical Hernia
It is very unlikely that an umbilical hernia would prevent DIEP flap surgery. Most umbilical hernias are small. A very large umbilical hernia can make the surgery harder but even this is not usually a contra-indication to having the procedure.
3) Previous Chest Radiation
One of the most important things for the reconstructive surgeon to achieve is to replace the damaged, firm irradiated tissue with normal, healthy, soft tissue. If the irradiated tissue is not healthy enough to be used as part of the reconstruction (as is the case in many instances), it will be removed and replaced by the healthy (DIEP) tissue.
I have visited with a fair number of patients who have previously been told they are not candidates for DIEP flap reconstruction because they received chest radiation after their mastectomy. I do not share this opinion.
Most of the time this advice seems to stem from fear that the radiation may have caused damage to the internal mammary vessels in the chest. These are the blood vessels that are usually used to connect the DIEP flap to the chest. In reality it is exceptionally rare for us to find these blood vessels are damaged and cannot be used.
4) Not the Right Amount of Tissue
You don't need to be overweight to be a candidate for a DIEP flap. What matters is the distribution of the fat. We have performed DIEP flaps on smaller breast, thin women with a BMI (body mass index) of 20 (and even less) because the fat that they did have was "in all the right places". Having said that, there is an upper limit beyond which the risks of surgery outweigh the benefits - At PRMA we set an upper BMI limit of 40 as we have found that performing the procedure on women with BMIs greater than this significantly increases the rates of complications (especially wound healing problems).
*****
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in the latest breast reconstruction techniques . He and his partners are in-network for most US insurance plans. Learn more about your breast reconstruction options and connect with other breast reconstruction patients here. You can also follow Dr C on Twitter!
*****
1) Previous Abdominal Surgery
While some types of previous abdominal surgery can make the DIEP flap procedure impossible to perform, most of the time previous abdominal surgery really isn't an issue.
Many women these days have had a previous c-section or hysterectomy. It is possible for these procedures to cause damage to the blood vessels needed for DIEP flap surgery, but this is rare. A previous c-section, hysterectomy, or tubal ligation is not a contra-indication to having the procedure.
If your surgeon is worried about potential damage from previous surgery then certain tests can be performed to examine the anatomy more closely. This can include a simple doppler ultrasound exam in the office or a more involved test like a CT angiogram.
So which previous surgeries DO cause a problem? Women that have had a previous TRAM flap, tummy tuck or very extensive abdominal wall surgeries (like complex repairs of huge hernias) cannot have a DIEP or SIEA flap reconstruction because the lower tummy tissue that is needed has already been removed, disconnected or moved around.
While previous abdominal surgeries may not prevent DIEP flap reconstruction, women that have had multiple previous abdominal procedures are at increased risk of abdominal complications like bulging and even hernia after DIEP flap surgery when compared to women that have never had prior abdominal surgery.
2) An Umbilical Hernia
It is very unlikely that an umbilical hernia would prevent DIEP flap surgery. Most umbilical hernias are small. A very large umbilical hernia can make the surgery harder but even this is not usually a contra-indication to having the procedure.
3) Previous Chest Radiation
One of the most important things for the reconstructive surgeon to achieve is to replace the damaged, firm irradiated tissue with normal, healthy, soft tissue. If the irradiated tissue is not healthy enough to be used as part of the reconstruction (as is the case in many instances), it will be removed and replaced by the healthy (DIEP) tissue.
I have visited with a fair number of patients who have previously been told they are not candidates for DIEP flap reconstruction because they received chest radiation after their mastectomy. I do not share this opinion.
Most of the time this advice seems to stem from fear that the radiation may have caused damage to the internal mammary vessels in the chest. These are the blood vessels that are usually used to connect the DIEP flap to the chest. In reality it is exceptionally rare for us to find these blood vessels are damaged and cannot be used.
4) Not the Right Amount of Tissue
You don't need to be overweight to be a candidate for a DIEP flap. What matters is the distribution of the fat. We have performed DIEP flaps on smaller breast, thin women with a BMI (body mass index) of 20 (and even less) because the fat that they did have was "in all the right places". Having said that, there is an upper limit beyond which the risks of surgery outweigh the benefits - At PRMA we set an upper BMI limit of 40 as we have found that performing the procedure on women with BMIs greater than this significantly increases the rates of complications (especially wound healing problems).
*****
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in the latest breast reconstruction techniques . He and his partners are in-network for most US insurance plans. Learn more about your breast reconstruction options and connect with other breast reconstruction patients here. You can also follow Dr C on Twitter!
*****
Wednesday, April 8, 2009
Impact of Radiation on Breast Reconstruction
Radiation therapy is often recommended as part of breast cancer treatment. Patients undergoing lumpectomy receive radiation routinely once they've healed from surgery. Some mastectomy patients also need radiation after surgery depending on the characteristics of the tumor.
I think it is fair to say that most reconstructive breast surgeons, myself included, are not particularly fond of radiation because of the way it impacts the patient's tissues (and breast reconstruction in general.) Nonetheless, it is important to remember that "life comes before breast" and in certain situations there is a definite benefit for the patient in having radiation therapy.
So what's the problem with radiation therapy (from a plastic surgeon's perspective)? For starters it can cause toughening (fibrosis) and shrinking (contracture) of the patient's tissue which makes the tissue lose its elasticity and become more tough and rigid. Skin color changes are common, red at first turning more brown over time. Radiation can also cause burn injuries as well as damage to underlying organs such as the lungs and heart. Anyone who is facing radiation therapy must discuss all the potential risks with their their radiation oncologist beforehand.
Women undergoing lumpectomy are often told that most of their breast will be preserved and that radiation is given "as insurance" to decrease the risk of cancer recurrence. What many women don't appreciate is that the breast can end up looking vastly different once the treatment is done because of radiation changes, even though they underwent "breast conservation". Many women end up going to see a plastic surgeon anyway to fix this unforeseen problem, which ironically can include the same reconstructive procedures as for mastectomy.
Radiation after a tissue reconstruction (eg tram flap, diep flap) can cause the reconstructed breast to shrink and harden. Unfortunately, this is a fairly common scenario. Less frequently (with heavy radiation doses), new wounds can develop in the reconstructed breast which need wound care. Patients facing radiation after flap breast reconstruction should know that there is a risk of needing further reconstructive surgery to correct changes caused by the radiation therapy. One study found a re-operation rate of almost 30% in patients receiving radiation after TRAM flap reconstruction.
Tissue expander / implant reconstructions fair even worse with radiation. The complication rates in this setting are much higher than with tissue reconstructions, including complete failure of the reconstruction altogether (and removal of the implant). Some surgeons routinely offer implant reconstructions to patients that are either facing or have already had radiation therapy. There are even articles published in the plastic surgery literature supporting it. I have to respectfully disagree (strongly). In my experience mixing implants with radiation typically ends badly. I will only do this in the very rare instance that there is absolutely no other option.
So what's the take-home message?
1) "Breast conservation" can fall short of the patient's cosmetic expectations.
2) breast implants and radiation do not mix well.
3) If you're facing radiation after mastectomy think twice about insisting on immediate reconstruction. You may be lucky and things may work out just fine. However, there's also a good chance you'll be signing up for more surgery than you bargained for.
Dr C
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy using the patient's own tissue. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest news in breast reconstruction surgery and research at The Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
I think it is fair to say that most reconstructive breast surgeons, myself included, are not particularly fond of radiation because of the way it impacts the patient's tissues (and breast reconstruction in general.) Nonetheless, it is important to remember that "life comes before breast" and in certain situations there is a definite benefit for the patient in having radiation therapy.
So what's the problem with radiation therapy (from a plastic surgeon's perspective)? For starters it can cause toughening (fibrosis) and shrinking (contracture) of the patient's tissue which makes the tissue lose its elasticity and become more tough and rigid. Skin color changes are common, red at first turning more brown over time. Radiation can also cause burn injuries as well as damage to underlying organs such as the lungs and heart. Anyone who is facing radiation therapy must discuss all the potential risks with their their radiation oncologist beforehand.
Women undergoing lumpectomy are often told that most of their breast will be preserved and that radiation is given "as insurance" to decrease the risk of cancer recurrence. What many women don't appreciate is that the breast can end up looking vastly different once the treatment is done because of radiation changes, even though they underwent "breast conservation". Many women end up going to see a plastic surgeon anyway to fix this unforeseen problem, which ironically can include the same reconstructive procedures as for mastectomy.
Radiation after a tissue reconstruction (eg tram flap, diep flap) can cause the reconstructed breast to shrink and harden. Unfortunately, this is a fairly common scenario. Less frequently (with heavy radiation doses), new wounds can develop in the reconstructed breast which need wound care. Patients facing radiation after flap breast reconstruction should know that there is a risk of needing further reconstructive surgery to correct changes caused by the radiation therapy. One study found a re-operation rate of almost 30% in patients receiving radiation after TRAM flap reconstruction.
Tissue expander / implant reconstructions fair even worse with radiation. The complication rates in this setting are much higher than with tissue reconstructions, including complete failure of the reconstruction altogether (and removal of the implant). Some surgeons routinely offer implant reconstructions to patients that are either facing or have already had radiation therapy. There are even articles published in the plastic surgery literature supporting it. I have to respectfully disagree (strongly). In my experience mixing implants with radiation typically ends badly. I will only do this in the very rare instance that there is absolutely no other option.
So what's the take-home message?
1) "Breast conservation" can fall short of the patient's cosmetic expectations.
2) breast implants and radiation do not mix well.
3) If you're facing radiation after mastectomy think twice about insisting on immediate reconstruction. You may be lucky and things may work out just fine. However, there's also a good chance you'll be signing up for more surgery than you bargained for.
Dr C
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy using the patient's own tissue. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest news in breast reconstruction surgery and research at The Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Breast Reconstruction With Tissue Much Safer Than Implants When Radiation Planned After Mastectomy
A study published in the November issue of the International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics examined the effect of radiation therapy on different methods of immediate breast reconstruction surgery. For breast cancer patients who receive radiation therapy after a mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction, autologous tissue reconstruction (ie reconstruction using their own tissue) provides fewer long-term complications and superior cosmetic results than breast reconstruction with a tissue expander and subsequent breast implant.
Two general types of breast reconstruction are available for patients facing mastectomy for breast cancer: autologous tissue reconstruction utilizing the patient's own tissue (eg DIEP flap, GAP flap, TRAM flap, or latissimus flap) transferred to the chest to recreate the breast(s); and tissue expander/implant reconstruction which involves placement of an inflatable tissue expander (temporary saline implant) and exchange for a permanent implant (saline or silicone) at a separate procedure later on.
This study involved the largest reported series of patients who sequentially underwent mastectomy, immediate reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy. Ninety-two patients were observed for a period of 38 months following breast reconstruction and radiation therapy.
None of the 23 patients reconstructed with their own tissue required further surgery while 33% of tissue expander/implant patients needed surgery to correct a problem with their reconstruction. Eighty-three percent of autologous reconstruction patients reported acceptable cosmetic results, as opposed to only 54% of implant patients.
"This study is useful for patients who are candidates for either [method of reconstruction] and are making a decision with regards to reconstruction technique," Jigna Jhaveri, M.D., lead author of the study and a radiation oncologist at Advanced Radiation Centers of New York in Hauppauge, N.Y., said. "Our study provides evidence that patients who undergo autologous tissue reconstruction and radiation therapy have fewer long term complications and better cosmetic outcomes than those who undergo tissue expander/implant reconstruction and radiation therapy."
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy, particularly advanced perforator flap techniques such as the DIEP flap procedure. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following The Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
Many women choose to undergo breast reconstruction surgery at the same time as their mastectomy procedure (under the same anesthetic). This avoids many of the psycho-social issues women face when dealing with a flat chest after mastectomy alone. However, frequently radiation can negatively affect the outcome of reconstruction and increase the risk of long-term complications.
Radiation therapy is increasingly becoming the standard of care for high-risk breast cancer patients after mastectomy in an attempt to decrease local cancer recurrence. However, this can cause a problem for both patients and their radiation oncologists.
Researchers at the Department of Radiation Oncology at Long Island Radiation Therapy in Garden City, N.Y., the Department of Surgery at Long Island Jewish Hospital in New Hyde Park, N.Y., the Department of Surgery at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y., and the Department of Surgery at Winthrop University Hospital in Mineola, N.Y., looked at whether the type of reconstruction performed in women receiving radiation after a mastectomy had an impact on their long-term outcomes.
Radiation therapy is increasingly becoming the standard of care for high-risk breast cancer patients after mastectomy in an attempt to decrease local cancer recurrence. However, this can cause a problem for both patients and their radiation oncologists.
Researchers at the Department of Radiation Oncology at Long Island Radiation Therapy in Garden City, N.Y., the Department of Surgery at Long Island Jewish Hospital in New Hyde Park, N.Y., the Department of Surgery at North Shore University Hospital in Manhasset, N.Y., and the Department of Surgery at Winthrop University Hospital in Mineola, N.Y., looked at whether the type of reconstruction performed in women receiving radiation after a mastectomy had an impact on their long-term outcomes.
Two general types of breast reconstruction are available for patients facing mastectomy for breast cancer: autologous tissue reconstruction utilizing the patient's own tissue (eg DIEP flap, GAP flap, TRAM flap, or latissimus flap) transferred to the chest to recreate the breast(s); and tissue expander/implant reconstruction which involves placement of an inflatable tissue expander (temporary saline implant) and exchange for a permanent implant (saline or silicone) at a separate procedure later on.
This study involved the largest reported series of patients who sequentially underwent mastectomy, immediate reconstruction and postmastectomy radiation therapy. Ninety-two patients were observed for a period of 38 months following breast reconstruction and radiation therapy.
Researchers found that autologous breast reconstruction is better tolerated by breast cancer patients because it is associated with fewer long-term complications and better cosmetic results than tissue expander/implant reconstruction.
None of the 23 patients reconstructed with their own tissue required further surgery while 33% of tissue expander/implant patients needed surgery to correct a problem with their reconstruction. Eighty-three percent of autologous reconstruction patients reported acceptable cosmetic results, as opposed to only 54% of implant patients.
"This study is useful for patients who are candidates for either [method of reconstruction] and are making a decision with regards to reconstruction technique," Jigna Jhaveri, M.D., lead author of the study and a radiation oncologist at Advanced Radiation Centers of New York in Hauppauge, N.Y., said. "Our study provides evidence that patients who undergo autologous tissue reconstruction and radiation therapy have fewer long term complications and better cosmetic outcomes than those who undergo tissue expander/implant reconstruction and radiation therapy."
*****
Here's my take....
While some plastic surgeons will disagree with this statement I strongly believe that breast implants and radiation therapy do not get along (at all). I feel the complication rate in implant-reconstructed women receiving radiation therapy is very high, particularly long-term. The handful of women that "do fine" in the short-term will very frequently end up with hard, uncomfortable breasts as the irradiated tissue firms-up over time and squeezes down on the implant. In my opinion the re-operation rate is too high for tissue expander/implant reconstruction to be offered as a routine option when radiation is on the table. This study confirms that breast reconstruction using the patient's own tissue is far safer than tissue expander/implant reconstruction in women facing radiation therapy after mastectomy.
Dr C
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified plastic surgeon specializing in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy, particularly advanced perforator flap techniques such as the DIEP flap procedure. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following The Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Breast Cancer Recurrence Not Related To Method Of Breast Reconstruction
One of my breast cancer patients called me today. She recently underwent bilateral mastectomies and immediate breast reconstruction with DIEP flaps. She recovered very well from the surgery but unfortunately her pathology results showed that she had cancer extending almost to the edge of the mastectomy specimen. The exact medical jargon used by the pathologist was.... "invasive carcinoma extending to 1mm from the margin". She also had DCIS (ductal carcinoma in situ) "extending to 0.2mm from the margin."
From a purist's perspective, these results still represent "clear margins". In other words, no tumor was found at the edge of the mastectomy specimen so there is no reason to believe there is any cancer left in my patient's breast. BUT, it's very close and that is certainly worrisome.
She called me today because she visited with her oncologist (cancer doc) and a radiation oncologist (cancer doc specializing in radiotherapy) and radiation therapy was recommended (in addition to the planned chemotherapy).
She explained to the radiation oncologist that she was worried the radiation therapy would ruin her DIEP flap reconstruction. She is right to be fearful of this - patients undergoing radiation therapy after an autologous reconstruction (ie a reconstruction using their own tissue) have a 28% risk of needing further surgery to correct asymmetry caused by the radiation changes (usually firming and shrinking) of the irradiated breast.
The response she received from the radiation oncologist baffled me (and is actually the reason behind this blogpost)...... "DIEP flap? What's a DIEP flap?.... if you'd had a TRAM flap then you wouldn't be needing radiation".
What?
This is a ridiculous statement. Let me clarify why...
This lady is being recommended radiation therapy as an insurance policy to decrease the risk of local recurrence (cancer coming back in the same breast). This is a consequence of her "near margins" which in turn are a result of the mastectomy specimen. Obviously the mastectomy was completed before the reconstruction was even started. If this lady had only had the mastectomy (without reconstruction) the margins would be the same. The breast reconstruction, and moreover, the type of breast reconstruction has absolutely nothing to do with it. The margins, the pathologist reading and the recommendation for radiation therapy would have been exactly the same whether reconstruction was performed or not.
So what's the take home message if you're considering breast reconstruction surgery? Choose whichever method of reconstruction is best for you. Your decision will not influence the likelihood of your cancer coming back in any way. The risk of cancer recurrence is related to the characteristics of the cancer itself and the mastectomy margins, not the method of reconstruction.
Dr C
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified breast reconstruction surgeon specializing in DIEP flap breast reconstruction surgery. He and his partners perform over 350 DIEP flap procedures each year with a success rate of over 99%. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following Dr Chrysopoulo's Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
From a purist's perspective, these results still represent "clear margins". In other words, no tumor was found at the edge of the mastectomy specimen so there is no reason to believe there is any cancer left in my patient's breast. BUT, it's very close and that is certainly worrisome.
She called me today because she visited with her oncologist (cancer doc) and a radiation oncologist (cancer doc specializing in radiotherapy) and radiation therapy was recommended (in addition to the planned chemotherapy).
She explained to the radiation oncologist that she was worried the radiation therapy would ruin her DIEP flap reconstruction. She is right to be fearful of this - patients undergoing radiation therapy after an autologous reconstruction (ie a reconstruction using their own tissue) have a 28% risk of needing further surgery to correct asymmetry caused by the radiation changes (usually firming and shrinking) of the irradiated breast.
The response she received from the radiation oncologist baffled me (and is actually the reason behind this blogpost)...... "DIEP flap? What's a DIEP flap?.... if you'd had a TRAM flap then you wouldn't be needing radiation".
What?
This is a ridiculous statement. Let me clarify why...
This lady is being recommended radiation therapy as an insurance policy to decrease the risk of local recurrence (cancer coming back in the same breast). This is a consequence of her "near margins" which in turn are a result of the mastectomy specimen. Obviously the mastectomy was completed before the reconstruction was even started. If this lady had only had the mastectomy (without reconstruction) the margins would be the same. The breast reconstruction, and moreover, the type of breast reconstruction has absolutely nothing to do with it. The margins, the pathologist reading and the recommendation for radiation therapy would have been exactly the same whether reconstruction was performed or not.
So what's the take home message if you're considering breast reconstruction surgery? Choose whichever method of reconstruction is best for you. Your decision will not influence the likelihood of your cancer coming back in any way. The risk of cancer recurrence is related to the characteristics of the cancer itself and the mastectomy margins, not the method of reconstruction.
Dr C
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is a board certified breast reconstruction surgeon specializing in DIEP flap breast reconstruction surgery. He and his partners perform over 350 DIEP flap procedures each year with a success rate of over 99%. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following Dr Chrysopoulo's Breast Cancer Reconstruction Blog.
******
Sunday, March 9, 2008
Hoisting a Pint
or, the Annals of Polycythemia Vera (in Vera Veritas)
Two weeks ago I went to LifeSource and got a pint of blood removed. I go again on Tuesday. I asked the phlebotomist why my blood couldn't be donated and she said because it won't be tested. Which of course begs the question.... Why not test it?
I think the blood-letting has helped. I may be getting less red in the face and sweating less upon exertion and upon hot-flashing.
The other morning I woke up and thought I heard that British veterans with my disease were suing the govenrment. I figured it had to be part of my dreamworld, but it was real. Apparently hundreds of British and New Zealand servicemen witnessed nuclear tests in the South Pacific in the 1950s, and claim that the radiation exposure caused them to develop polycythemia and other illnesses. Some suffered immediate effects from the radiation: "Several chaps lost teeth, and others lost their hair," according to a serviceman who was 18 at the time and a radio operator aboard a HMS. "So a lot of wives and sweethearts waited in Devonport to welcome back bald fiances and bald boyfriends with a few teeth missing," Others developed PV later or cancers. Some 700 of them have banded together to sue the British Dept. of Defence for compensation.
The former radio operator quoted above was diagnosed with polycythemia in 1974. The BBC refers to it as "a rare form of blood cancer" that his doctors have linked to his exposure to radiation. (For his sake and the sake of the lawsuit, the disease should be as dire as possible; it's sometimes considered pre-cancerous, as a small percentage of people with it develop leukemia, and it's sometimes considered cancer, but it's not really cancer-cancer.)
I felt like saying, "Aha," when I read about the British lawsuit, though I have never sailed the high seas for the United Kingdom. I'm of a mind to blame large institutions for bad things that happen to people. (See my book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, Blame the Military-Industrial Complex. ;>))But I was never around a nuclear test. I had a lot of chest X-rays as a child because of my asthma and the two times I had pneumonia, but how could I ever prove a connection between the X-rays and the polycythemia? I'm not part of a group of sailors or soldiers or anything else that had repeated chest X-rays. I am a lone Cancer Bitch from the lone prairie. With extra-thick blood and a bad attitude.
Two weeks ago I went to LifeSource and got a pint of blood removed. I go again on Tuesday. I asked the phlebotomist why my blood couldn't be donated and she said because it won't be tested. Which of course begs the question.... Why not test it?
I think the blood-letting has helped. I may be getting less red in the face and sweating less upon exertion and upon hot-flashing.
The other morning I woke up and thought I heard that British veterans with my disease were suing the govenrment. I figured it had to be part of my dreamworld, but it was real. Apparently hundreds of British and New Zealand servicemen witnessed nuclear tests in the South Pacific in the 1950s, and claim that the radiation exposure caused them to develop polycythemia and other illnesses. Some suffered immediate effects from the radiation: "Several chaps lost teeth, and others lost their hair," according to a serviceman who was 18 at the time and a radio operator aboard a HMS. "So a lot of wives and sweethearts waited in Devonport to welcome back bald fiances and bald boyfriends with a few teeth missing," Others developed PV later or cancers. Some 700 of them have banded together to sue the British Dept. of Defence for compensation.
The former radio operator quoted above was diagnosed with polycythemia in 1974. The BBC refers to it as "a rare form of blood cancer" that his doctors have linked to his exposure to radiation. (For his sake and the sake of the lawsuit, the disease should be as dire as possible; it's sometimes considered pre-cancerous, as a small percentage of people with it develop leukemia, and it's sometimes considered cancer, but it's not really cancer-cancer.)
I felt like saying, "Aha," when I read about the British lawsuit, though I have never sailed the high seas for the United Kingdom. I'm of a mind to blame large institutions for bad things that happen to people. (See my book, When Bad Things Happen to Good People, Blame the Military-Industrial Complex. ;>))But I was never around a nuclear test. I had a lot of chest X-rays as a child because of my asthma and the two times I had pneumonia, but how could I ever prove a connection between the X-rays and the polycythemia? I'm not part of a group of sailors or soldiers or anything else that had repeated chest X-rays. I am a lone Cancer Bitch from the lone prairie. With extra-thick blood and a bad attitude.
Wednesday, July 18, 2007
This Sucks More Than I Thought
Just got back from my oncologist appointment, which lasted two and a half hours. They had lots to say. Apparently, most women going in for breast cancer have one lump requiring surgery and radiation or some such. Me, I have three--three confirmed, I should add, as the doctor said--which cover a large portion of my breast. When the docs said the word "mastectomy," it was kind of hard to hear. Sure, I've been joking about it, but to actually think of it as something that's become my reality, it was sort of like, oh shit.
So in the next few weeks, I'm going to have a bunch of blood tests, bone scan, chest x-ray, ultrasound and god knows what else done. Then start my first round of chemo. I'm going go through chemo for about six months. Then the mastectomy (hopefully, some miraculous shrinkage will occur so this won't have to happen), and then radiation. There goes about a year of my life.
This is really fucked up. Like, for real. Henry was good--taking notes and asking questions. I'm glad to see that those years at Princeton didn't go to waste. He even got to give the doc a quick lecture on the history of migration in the Pacific region. :)
Well....well. Okay, so like everything else, I must deal with this with the same gusto as ever!
So in the next few weeks, I'm going to have a bunch of blood tests, bone scan, chest x-ray, ultrasound and god knows what else done. Then start my first round of chemo. I'm going go through chemo for about six months. Then the mastectomy (hopefully, some miraculous shrinkage will occur so this won't have to happen), and then radiation. There goes about a year of my life.
This is really fucked up. Like, for real. Henry was good--taking notes and asking questions. I'm glad to see that those years at Princeton didn't go to waste. He even got to give the doc a quick lecture on the history of migration in the Pacific region. :)
Well....well. Okay, so like everything else, I must deal with this with the same gusto as ever!
Saturday, November 18, 2006
One-Third of Breast Cancer Patients Unhappy with Outcome of Lumpectomy
Women with breast cancer often undergo a lumpectomy and radiation to save their breasts and avoid the need for additional reconstructive surgery. However, approximately one-third of all patients are unhappy with how their breasts look after undergoing breast conservation therapy and many would consider reconstruction, according to a study presented today at the American Society of Plastic Surgeons (ASPS) Plastic Surgery 2006 conference in San Francisco.
“I have patients walking into my office saying lumpectomy was supposed to save their breast but what’s left doesn’t look like a breast to them,” said Howard Wang, ASPS Member Surgeon and co-author of the study. “Conservation is believed to be an acceptable way of saving a woman’s breast. But many of these women are coming to plastic surgeons for help, saying it isn’t so.”
In the study, 28 percent of the breast cancer patients stated they were dissatisfied with the cosmetic result of their lumpectomy. Of those patients, 46 percent stated their physical appearance was worse or much worse after the surgery and were considering reconstruction. Only nine percent of patients who were satisfied with the outcome, however, would consider reconstruction if it were offered.
Approximately 26 percent of patients were unhappy with their physical appearance after the lumpectomy but had an improved sense of body image. Plastic surgeons believe this disparity occurred because many patients felt relieved to be free of the cancer, leading them to feel better about their bodies even though they were not happy with how their breasts looked.
According to the American Cancer Society, almost 213,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year. Almost 58,000 women underwent breast reconstruction surgery in 2005, according to ASPS.
“Patients should know their options and understand that just because they undergo a lumpectomy to save their breast does not mean they will be happy with the cosmetic outcome,” said Dr. Wang. “Oncologists need to work with patients to help them understand the potential physical outcomes and refer them to a board-certified plastic surgeon to consider all of their choices.”
For referrals to ASPS Member Surgeons certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery, call 888-4-PLASTIC (475-2784) or visit www.plasticsurgery.org where you can also learn more about cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery.
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons is the largest organization of board-certified plastic surgeons in the world. With more than 6,000 members, the society is recognized as a leading authority and information source on cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery. ASPS comprises 94 percent of all board-certified plastic surgeons in the United States. Founded in 1931, the society represents physicians certified by The American Board of Plastic Surgery or The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is board certified in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and specializes in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy for breast cancer. He and his partners perform hundreds of microsurgical breast reconstructions with perforator flaps each year including the DIEP flap procedure. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following Dr Chrysopoulo's Breast Reconstruction Blog.
******
“I have patients walking into my office saying lumpectomy was supposed to save their breast but what’s left doesn’t look like a breast to them,” said Howard Wang, ASPS Member Surgeon and co-author of the study. “Conservation is believed to be an acceptable way of saving a woman’s breast. But many of these women are coming to plastic surgeons for help, saying it isn’t so.”
In the study, 28 percent of the breast cancer patients stated they were dissatisfied with the cosmetic result of their lumpectomy. Of those patients, 46 percent stated their physical appearance was worse or much worse after the surgery and were considering reconstruction. Only nine percent of patients who were satisfied with the outcome, however, would consider reconstruction if it were offered.
Approximately 26 percent of patients were unhappy with their physical appearance after the lumpectomy but had an improved sense of body image. Plastic surgeons believe this disparity occurred because many patients felt relieved to be free of the cancer, leading them to feel better about their bodies even though they were not happy with how their breasts looked.
According to the American Cancer Society, almost 213,000 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year. Almost 58,000 women underwent breast reconstruction surgery in 2005, according to ASPS.
“Patients should know their options and understand that just because they undergo a lumpectomy to save their breast does not mean they will be happy with the cosmetic outcome,” said Dr. Wang. “Oncologists need to work with patients to help them understand the potential physical outcomes and refer them to a board-certified plastic surgeon to consider all of their choices.”
For referrals to ASPS Member Surgeons certified by the American Board of Plastic Surgery, call 888-4-PLASTIC (475-2784) or visit www.plasticsurgery.org where you can also learn more about cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery.
The American Society of Plastic Surgeons is the largest organization of board-certified plastic surgeons in the world. With more than 6,000 members, the society is recognized as a leading authority and information source on cosmetic and reconstructive plastic surgery. ASPS comprises 94 percent of all board-certified plastic surgeons in the United States. Founded in 1931, the society represents physicians certified by The American Board of Plastic Surgery or The Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada.
******
Dr Chrysopoulo is board certified in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and specializes in breast reconstruction surgery after mastectomy for breast cancer. He and his partners perform hundreds of microsurgical breast reconstructions with perforator flaps each year including the DIEP flap procedure. PRMA Plastic Surgery, San Antonio, Texas. Toll Free: (800) 692-5565. Keep up to date with the latest breast reconstruction news by following Dr Chrysopoulo's Breast Reconstruction Blog.
******
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)