LOS ANGELES, Nov. 20, 2009 – The Breast Preservation Foundation will appear on the hit show ‘The Doctors’ today at 11:00 a.m Pacific Time on KCAL.

Dr. Joel Aronowitz, the Foundation’s president and founder, will be featured in a segment highlighting skin-sparing mastectomy as an advanced surgical alternative to traditional mastectomy, which can result in terribly disfiguring scars. Appearing with mother-daughter patients who received the skin-sparing procedure before undergoing same-day breast reconstructive surgery, Dr. Aronowitz explains the differences between the two types of mastectomy procedures and demonstrates the minimally invasive technique with the help of visual aids and computer graphics.

The segment will be one of the key highlights of today’s episode titled, “Warning: Clues Your Body is Giving You.”

The Breast Preservation Foundation segment will be available along with comprehensive local listing information at www.thedoctorstv.com.

‘The Doctors’ is a syndicated one-hour daytime talk show that features a panel of four physicians with different medical specialties. ER physician Dr. Travis Stork; OB/GYN Lisa Masterson; cosmetic surgeon Dr. Andrew Ordon and pediatrician Dr. Jim Sears engage in frank discussion in an off-the-cuff manner, making it one of TV’s most popular and watched programs.

More About Skin-Sparing Mastectomy

A skin-sparing mastectomy, also known as breast-conserving surgery, is a way to treat cancer and save the breast skin. In so doing it causes much less scarring than a traditional mastectomy. The skin-sparing procedure removes cancerous breast tissue through a small incision usually around the areola area of the nipple. The surgeon leaves most of the breast skin, creating a natural skin envelope, or pocket, that is filled with a breast implant or with the patient’s own tissue from another part of her body. The skin-sparing technique significantly improves the cosmetic outcome and gives the best option for reconstruction.

About Breast Preservation Foundation

The Breast Preservation Foundation’s (BPF) mission is to educate women about skin-sparing mastectomies and its advantages for an overall better cosmetic result. The BPF’s goal is to inform and empower women to ask more questions before having a potentially disfiguring biopsy, lumpectomy and traditional mastectomy. The BPF advocates that women insist their breast surgeon recognize the importance of preserving the breast which can improve their quality of life after receiving a breast cancer diagnosis.

For more information about skin-sparing mastectomies, breast cancer survival and the Breast Preservation Foundation, please visit www.BreastPreservation.org.

# # #

]]> http://www.breastpreservationfoundation.org/2009/11/breast-preservation-foundation-to-appear-on-hit-cbs-show-the-doctors/feed/ 0 http://www.breastpreservationfoundation.org/2009/11/reuters-health-immediate-postmastectomy-reconstruction-tied-to-better-breast-cancer-survival/ http://www.breastpreservationfoundation.org/2009/11/reuters-health-immediate-postmastectomy-reconstruction-tied-to-better-breast-cancer-survival/#comments Wed, 11 Nov 2009 02:02:28 +0000 admin http://www.breastpreservationfoundation.org/?p=573 NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Immediate reconstruction following mastectomy is associated with a 26% reduction in breast cancer-specific mortality, according to a report in the October 15th issue of Cancer.

“Although the results of our study are interesting, it must be remembered that an association between postmastectomy reconstruction and improved survival doesn’t mean causation,” Dr. Michael Bezuhly from Dalhousie University, Halifax, Canada told Reuters Health. “I believe the difference in breast cancer-specific survival that we observed between women who did and did not undergo reconstruction is driven more by differences in access to care and socioeconomic status than any other factors.”

Dr. Bezuhly and colleagues analyzed data from the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program to compare survival between patients who underwent mastectomy alone or combined with immediate reconstruction. The analysis included 54,660 women with a median follow-up period of 59 months.

As noted, women who had any type of immediate breast reconstruction, including implant and autologous reconstruction, had a 26% decrease in breast cancer-specific mortality compared with women who underwent mastectomy alone, the authors report.

The improved survival was present among women in all age groups, with those 70 years of age and older having the lowest risk of death among all those undergoing reconstruction.

In the subgroup of women undergoing implant reconstruction, only those younger than 50 years experienced a reduction in cause-specific mortality. Autologous reconstruction was associated with a survival advantage among women under 70 years.

“It is unclear why the results differ between autologous and implant reconstruction patients,” Dr. Bezuhly said. “Some groups have suggested that the implant, being a foreign body, actually elicits a host response which may indirectly increase tumor immunosurveillance. More likely, the results are being driven by an unmeasured difference between these patient groups, be it in terms of general fitness and lifestyle choices, or access to health care.”

Other factors associated with a lower breast cancer-specific mortality included younger age, being married, non-African American race, noninflammatory histology, estrogen receptor or progesterone receptor positive status, and absence of radiotherapy.

“Currently our group is undertaking a similar study using Canadian data,” Dr. Bezuhly said. “The advantage of a Canadian study is that access to care in the Canadian universal health care system is, in theory, less of an issue. In addition, the Canadian data provides us with many variables that we were unable to capture through the US SEER registry, namely comorbidities and socioeconomic factors like education and income level.”

A large pink ribbon hangs from the North Portico of the White House on October 26. October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month.

In a fitting send-off to breast cancer awareness month, the White House’s North Portico this week sports a massive pink ribbon. And at a Friday event for breast cancer, first lady Michelle Obama said, “We have a healthcare system in this country that simply is not working for too many people with breast cancer.” While it’s nice that so much attention has been paid to this disease, I think women—myself included—still need a lot of education on the topic. Two weeks ago, I reported on a study that found that about 25 percent of breast cancer patients who qualify for breast-conserving surgery aren’t getting it. I wondered why they insist on getting mastectomies when research shows they’re not getting an increased survival benefit.

Well, I got some answers from astute readers who had personally faced the dilemma. One woman wrote: “I am in the middle of making these decisions for myself. My DCIS [ductal carcinoma in situ, potentially a precursor to invasive cancer] is large and the Dr. has given me a choice between lumpectomy and mastectomy and explained that the survival rate is close to 100 percent in either case. It’s the fear of recurrence and that the NEXT cancer would be invasive and deadly that spurs me and other women to [have] mastectomy and reconstruction.” Another wrote that having a mom and two aunts previously diagnosed with breast cancer, “I did what many women do with families like mine, they fight it hard and fast. I did double mastectomy with reconstruction.” Others told me that they would have faced reconstruction even with a lumpectomy given the amount of tissue that needed to be removed; what’s more, some were told the radiation treatments necessitated by a lumpectomy could make the surrounding skin more fragile and harder to stretch for reconstruction. All in all, in one woman’s words, “The decision to have a mastectomy ‘against medical advice’ might seem illogical, but sometimes it is based on reasons that are very legitimate for a particular patient.”

Joel Aronowitz, chief of plastic surgery at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles, commented that “every woman is entitled to her own decision.” I gave him a call and found out that he started a nonprofit organization 18 months ago to educate breast cancer patients about their options for surgical treatment and breast reconstruction. He gave me some important pieces of information that I thought could be useful for women newly diagnosed with the disease.

First of all, lumpectomies and mastectomies can both be disfiguring and may, indeed, require some sort of reconstructive procedure if women are concerned about the cosmetic appearance of their breasts. For this reason, he recommends meeting with a plastic surgeon before the operation to discuss the options. “A plastic surgeon should be part of the equation from the get-go. We frequently see women after the fact,” Aronowitz tells me, “and have to clean up the mess made by breast surgeons and general surgeons.”

For example, he says, women can often have skin- and nipple-sparing mastectomies instead of the traditional modified radical procedure that leaves a giant, lancet-shaped scar and makes achieving a natural look via reconstruction very difficult. A 1995 study found that survival rates with the skin-sparing procedure are similar to those with the radical procedure as long as the tumor isn’t penetrating through the skin. Retaining the nipple, Aronowitz says, is somewhat more controversial since some breast tumors originate in milk ducts that lead to the nipple, but the latest research suggests it’s not risky if the tumor is located far away. (Unfortunately, those who have the nipple- and skin-sparing procedure may still lose sensation in those areas, a problem that I previously blogged about in this post on sex after breast cancer.)

Aronowitz says newly diagnosed breast cancer patients should be aware that they might be able to have reconstruction at the same time as the surgery to remove their cancer, sparing the need for a second operation. Insurance usually covers procedures on both breasts to achieve the desired cosmetic result. “Some women need breast reduction or a breast lift” to achieve symmetry, he explains, while others with naturally small breasts may opt for implants in both if they want a larger cup size.

All in all, the decision over what type of breast surgery to have is very individual, and women need to discuss all their options—preferably with a coordinated team of doctors that includes an oncologist, breast surgeon, and plastic surgeon. “If a patient is concerned about the cosmetic outcome, she needs to open her mouth and ask where the incisions are going to be made and what they’re going to look like afterward,” Aronowitz says. And, yes, women should be informed about studies showing similar survival rates among lumpectomy and mastectomy patients with early-stage tumors, and they should also be told that neither surgery will remove 100 percent of their breast tissue. Even mastectomies, he says, leave at least 5 percent of breast tissue behind.

For more information about reconstruction options, check out the Breast Preservation Foundation website run by Aronowitz. It can also provide a referral to surgeons who perform skin-sparing mastectomies.

Related News: The Difficulties of Breast Reconstruction
Tags: breast cancer | women’s health

About On Women
Deborah Kotz, senior writer for U.S. News & World Report, covers everything women care about when it comes to their health. She’s often tapping out “Oprah-esque” confessions about how the latest news relates to her personally—whether it’s on breast cancer, contraception or easing work-family stress. She’d love to hear your confessions too at onwomen@usnews.com. Also, you can follow Deborah on Twitter at twitter.com/debkotz2.