Abstract
The aim of this study is to investigate the use of absorbable mesh in breast surgery in Korea. We conducted a survey from members of Korea Breast Cancer Society by phone, E-mail, and notice on the website from 6th to 20th April 2009. A total of 54 breast surgeons had responded to the survey. Of these, 40 surgeons (74.1%) had used absorbable mesh during breast surgery, with Vicryl mesh® being the choice of every surgeon and Interceed® having been used by 36 (90%) of the surgeons. In responding to the indications for mesh use, 26 surgeons (65%) indicated that mesh use was effective when a deformity was expected regardless of T stage. Contraindications for mesh use principally included existing patients' comorbidity such as a wound healing problem, diabetes mellitus and immunocompromised condition. Thirty one surgeons (77.5%) had experienced an infection in the mesh insertion site. However, on a case basis, only 39 of 843 cases (4.6%) had resulted in an infection. In the follow up after mesh use, 33 of the 37 responding surgeons (89.2%) used breast ultrasonography. Nineteen of the 38 respondents (50%) replied that the mesh was absorbed in 6 months and it did not confuse diagnostic imaging. The cited merits of mesh included maintenance of breast shape following surgery (n=38/49, 77.6%) and ease of surgical use (n=35/49, 71.4%). However, the high price of mesh was cited as a disadvantage by 33 of the 48 respondents (68.8%). In summary, survey results mentioned above show that surgical mesh use in breast surgery is increasing by times and the procedures greatly varies by surgeons. Thereby, we suggest that a guideline for mesh use should be made in the near future.
References
1. The Korean Breast Cancer Society. Nationwide Korean breast cancer data of 2004 using breast cancer registration program. J Breast Cancer. 2006. 9:151–161.
2. Ko SS. Korean Breast Cancer Society. Chronological changing patterns of clinical characteristics of Korean breast cancer patients during 10 years (1996-2006) using nationwide breast cancer registration on-line program: biannual update. J Surg Oncol. 2008. 98:318–323.
3. Fisher B, Bauer M, Margolese R, Poisson R, Redmond C, Fisher E. Five-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and segmental mastectomy with or without radiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1985. 312:665–673.
4. Eom TI, Kim BS, Koo BY, Kim JW, Lim YA, Lee HH, et al. The use of a corrective procedure with vicryl mesh for oncoplastic surgery of the breast. J Breast Cancer. 2009. 12:36–40.
5. Clough KB, Lewis JS, Fitoussi A, Faucoult MC. Oncoplastic techniques allow extensive resection for breast-conserving therapy of breast carcinomas. Ann Surg. 2003. 237:26–34.
6. Ohuchi N, Harada Y, Ishida T. Breast conserving surgery for primary breast cancer: immediate volume replace using lateral tissue flap. Breast Cancer. 1997. 4:59–65.
7. Rietjens M, Urban CA, Rey PC, Mazzarol G, Maisonneuve P, Garusi C, et al. Long-term oncological results of breast conservative treatment with oncoplastic surgery. Breast. 2007. 16:387–395.