We're unable to sign you in at this time. Please try again in a few minutes.
We were able to sign you in, but your subscription(s) could not be found. Please try again in a few minutes.
There may be a problem with your account. Please contact the AMA Service Center to resolve this issue.
Contact the AMA Service Center:
Telephone: 1 (800) 262-2350 or 1 (312) 670-7827  *   Email: subscriptions@jamanetwork.com
Error Message ......
Invited Critique |

Nipple-Sparing Mastectomy Update—Invited Critique

Lisa K. Jacobs, MD; Anna M. Voltura, MD
Arch Surg. 2008;143(11):1110. doi:10.1001/archsurg.143.11.1110.
Text Size: A A A
Published online


When considering NSM, the most important factor is the oncologic safety of the procedure. There are populations of patients, specifically those undergoing prophylactic mastectomy, where NSM is a good choice. However, in patients with breast cancer, the oncologic safety becomes paramount. The Crowe et al article is a triumph in number of cases and developed technique, but it provides less convincing evidence that NSM is oncologically sound.

To know if this is a safe cancer operation, we must determine if the risk of local recurrence is increased by leaving the NAC. Of the 43 patients with invasive breast cancer reported, 4 developed recurrence, a 9% recurrence rate. The recurrence rate after mastectomy is 3% to 6%, and for lumpectomy and radiation therapy, it is 6% to 8%. One must question whether NSM results in equivalent local control compared with standard therapies. While the recurrences reported herein are not at the NAC, the recurrence rate is relatively high in a breast cancer population selected for low-risk disease. Crowe et al report strict selection criteria that would predict a low risk for local recurrence; however, the evidence establishing those selection criteria is not described nor is the expected local recurrence after standard mastectomy in the same population.

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

First Page Preview

View Large
First page PDF preview





Also Meets CME requirements for:
Browse CME for all U.S. States
Accreditation Information
The American Medical Association is accredited by the Accreditation Council for Continuing Medical Education to provide continuing medical education for physicians. The AMA designates this journal-based CME activity for a maximum of 1 AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM per course. Physicians should claim only the credit commensurate with the extent of their participation in the activity. Physicians who complete the CME course and score at least 80% correct on the quiz are eligible for AMA PRA Category 1 CreditTM.
Note: You must get at least of the answers correct to pass this quiz.
Please click the checkbox indicating that you have read the full article in order to submit your answers.
Your answers have been saved for later.
You have not filled in all the answers to complete this quiz
The following questions were not answered:
Sorry, you have unsuccessfully completed this CME quiz with a score of
The following questions were not answered correctly:
Commitment to Change (optional):
Indicate what change(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.
Your quiz results:
The filled radio buttons indicate your responses. The preferred responses are highlighted
For CME Course: A Proposed Model for Initial Assessment and Management of Acute Heart Failure Syndromes
Indicate what changes(s) you will implement in your practice, if any, based on this CME course.


Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

0 Citations

Sign in

Purchase Options

• Buy this article
• Subscribe to the journal
• Rent this article ?

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging & repositioning the boxes below.

See Also...
Articles Related By Topic
Related Collections
PubMed Articles