Despite increasing rates of pregnancy-related and postpartum breast cancers and growing recognition of oncofertility as an important component of survivorship, few guidelines exist to guide surgical oncologists in managing lactation during or after breast cancer treatment. To address this need, the American Society of Breast Surgeons developed evidence-based oncolactation recommendations for breast cancer patients. This review outlines the management of patients with breast cancer diagnosed during pregnancy or lactation, and provides guidance regarding surgery, radiation, and systemic therapy. It also reviews strategies for supporting lactation following breast cancer treatment and discusses screening in the pregnant and lactating population.

BackgroundGranulomatous mastitis (GM) is a benign, chronic, inflammatory disease lacking clear treatment guidelines. The purpose of this American Society of Breast Surgeons (ASBrS) prospective, multisite registry was to characterize the presentation of GM and identify treatment strategies associated with symptom resolution and optimal cosmesis.MethodsASBrS members entered data into a registry on patient demographics, treatment, symptoms, and cosmesis over a 1-year period. Initial symptoms were graded as mild, moderate, or severe. The Chi-square test and logistic regression were used to identify factors related to symptom improvement and cosmesis.ResultsOverall, 112 patients with a mean age of 36 years were included. More patients were Hispanic (49.1%) and from the Southwest (41.1%), and management included observation (4.5%), medical (70.5%), surgical (5.4%), or combination treatment (19.6%). Immunosuppression was used in 83 patients (74.1%), including 43 patients who received intralesional steroid injections. Patients with severe symptoms were more likely to undergo surgical intervention compared with those with mild or moderate symptoms (21.4% vs. 0% and 7.5%, respectively; p = 0.004). Within 1 year, 85 patients (75.9%) experienced symptom improvement and/or resolution at a median of 3 months. Receipt of immunosuppressive therapy was predictive of improvement or resolution at 1 month (odds ratio 4.22; p = 0.045). One-year physician-assessed cosmesis was excellent or good for 20/35 patients (57.1%) and was not associated with type of treatment or symptom severity.ConclusionAlthough GM can have a protracted course, the majority of patients in this registry resolved within 1 year, with good cosmetic result. Treatment with immunosuppression appears to be most beneficial, and a symptom-based algorithm may be helpful to guide treatment.

Introduction Bedsharing is common but advised against by the American Academy of Pediatrics. It is unknown if breastfeeding physicians bedshare more or less than the general population. Objectives To determine the prevalence of bedsharing among physicians, their reasons for bedsharing or not, and whether bedsharing was associated with a longer duration of breastfeeding. Methods An online survey was adapted from surveys administered by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The survey was administered to physicians and medical students who birthed children from October 2020 through August 2021. Respondents were asked to report on a singleton birth, and questions centered around sleep practices and breastfeeding. Survival analysis was used to examine the association between bedsharing and breastfeeding duration. Results Of 546 respondents with bedsharing data, 68% reported some history of bedsharing, and 77% were in specialties that involved caring for pregnant people and/or infants. Those who bedshared breastfed an average of four months longer than those who never bedshared (18.08 versus 14.08 months p<0.001). The adjusted risk of breastfeeding cessation was markedly lower for those who bedshared compared to those who did not (Hazard Ratio 0.57, 95% Confidence Interval 0.45, 0.71). The primary reason for bedsharing was to breastfeed (73%); the primary reason for not bedsharing was safety concerns (92%). Among those who bedshared (n = 373), 52% did not inform their child’s healthcare provider. Conclusions Bedsharing is common among our sample of mainly breastfeeding physicians, including those who care for pregnant people and/or infants. It is also associated with a longer duration of breastfeeding, which has implications for population health. Practicing bedsharing implies cognitive dissidence and may affect how physicians counsel about bedsharing. Additionally, lack of disclosure of bedsharing practices has implications for practical guidance about having open non-judgmental conversations and may be a missed opportunity to counsel on bedsharing safety.

Background. The availability and extent of breastfeeding-specific surgical training has not been previously described. We aimed to survey breast surgeons on their lactation education and desire for additional knowledge.Methods. Members of the American Society of Breast Surgeons were invited via email to anonymously complete an electronic survey from 27 October 2021 to 23 January 2022. The survey content included demographic information, sources of lactation education, and desired topics and methods for further training. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the data.Results. A total of 2698 surveys were delivered and 542 (20.1%) completed. While nearly all respondents (99%) reported treating lactating patients at least once or twice per year, 78% reported that their training was inadequate. The most frequently cited sources of lactation information were peer-to-peer informal knowledge sharing (50%) and personal experience with breastfeeding (44%). Nearly all respondents (99%) agreed that formal lactation education would benefit breast surgeons. Specific topics of interest included management of patients with complications of lactation (48%), management of lactating patients with a new diagnosis of breast cancer (47%), and counseling patients with pregnancy-associated breast cancer who desire to breastfeed (46%). The most frequently recommended educational formats included presentation at a national conference (60%), evidence-based management guidelines (58%), webinar (55%), and workshop/course (47%).Conclusion. Breast surgeons self-report minimal formal training in the management of benign and malignant breast disease in lactating patients and strong desire for expanded education. Development of clinical practice guidelines and additional educational content for surgeons should be considered to meet the needs of this patient population.

Increasingly, young women are undergoing bilateral mastectomies before the completion of childbearing. This procedure, when performed prematurely, precludes any future lactation. However, not breastfeeding increases maternal and child morbidity and mortality, and carries an overall U.S. financial cost of $18.5 billion per year. The emotional and physical consequences of bilateral mastectomy in this patient population should be more carefully considered, and any prophylactic surgery deferred until childbearing has been completed.

This JAMA Insights Clinical Update reviews the risk factors for and symptoms of lactational mastitis and provides a potential treatment algorithm.

The breast is a complex organ with growth, evolution and regression over life. Its functional capacity changes dramatically through pregnancy and lactation. Of the numerous conditions which can affect the breast, some occur specifically during lactation. A good understanding of anatomy and physiology of the breast and nipple-areolar complex is essential, including anatomic variations of normal. Clinicians caring for breastfeeding mothers should master the management of common lactation-related conditions: engorgement, plugging, mastitis, galactocele, milk fistula, dermatitis/ dermatoses, pain, and hyperlactation. Beyond that, they should be familiar with breast disease that is not related specifically to lactation, but can occur in the setting of lactation. Breast cancer care occurring prior to or during lactation can significantly impact lactation, and should be considered in management of the breastfeeding dyad. Equally important are the surgeries of the breast and nipple-areolar complex, and their potential effects on breastfeeding. Patients with a history of breast surgery, cancer or other notable conditions of the breast should receive prenatal counseling and close postpartum support.

The lactating breast can develop a wide range of conditions that require surgical management, from abscess drainage to the evaluation of nipple-areolar complex (NAC) lesions. In addition, both benign and malignant masses can present in the lactating population. Patients should undergo routine diagnostic workup including core needle biopsy if indicated. Ultrasound, mammogram, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with gadolinium contrast are safe in lactation and do not require interruption of breastfeeding.

A central goal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine is the development of clinical protocols for managing common medical problems that may impact breastfeeding success. These protocols serve only as guidelines for the care of breastfeeding mothers and infants and do not delineate an exclusive course of treatment or serve as standards of medical care. Variations in treatment may be appropriate according to the needs of an individual patient. The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine recognizes that not all lactating individuals identify as women. Using gender-inclusive language, however, is not possible in all languages and all countries and for all readers. The position of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine (https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2021.29188.abm) is to interpret clinical protocols within the framework of inclusivity of all breastfeeding, chestfeeding, and human milk-feeding individuals.

Breastfeeding MedicineVol. 17, No. 11 CorrespondenceRe: “Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #36: The Mastitis Spectrum, Revised 2022” by Mitchell et al.Carmela Baeza, Jose Maria Paricio-Talayero, Monica Pina, and Concepcion De AlbaCarmela BaezaAddress correspondence to: Carmela Baeza, MD, Lactancia Materna, CAF Raices, Madrid 28014, Spain E-mail Address: lactancia@centroraices.comhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-5573-2861Lactancia Materna, CAF Raices, Madrid, Spain.Search for more papers by this author, Jose Maria Paricio-TalayeroAsociación Promoción e Investigación científicocultural de la Lactancia Materna (APILAM), Gandia, Spain.Search for more papers by this author, Monica PinaInternal Medicine, Clínica Planalto, Lisbon, Portugal.Search for more papers by this author, and Concepcion De AlbaNeonatologia, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain.Search for more papers by this authorPublished Online:14 Nov 2022https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2022.0129AboutSectionsView articleView Full TextPDF/EPUB Permissions & CitationsPermissionsDownload CitationsTrack CitationsAdd to favorites Back To Publication ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail View article"Re: “Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #36: The Mastitis Spectrum, Revised 2022” by Mitchell et al.." Breastfeeding Medicine, 17(11), pp. 970–971FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited byResponse to Baeza et al. re: “Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #36: The Mastitis Spectrum, Revised 2022” Katrina B. Mitchell, Helen M. Johnson, Juan Miguel Rodriguez, Anne Eglash, Charlotte Scherzinger, Kyle Widmer, Pamela Berens, Brooke Miller, and 14 November 2022 | Breastfeeding Medicine, Vol. 17, No. 11 Volume 17Issue 11Nov 2022 InformationCopyright 2022, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishersTo cite this article:Carmela Baeza, Jose Maria Paricio-Talayero, Monica Pina, and Concepcion De Alba.Re: “Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Clinical Protocol #36: The Mastitis Spectrum, Revised 2022” by Mitchell et al..Breastfeeding Medicine.Nov 2022.970-971.http://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2022.0129Published in Volume: 17 Issue 11: November 14, 2022PDF download

A central goal of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine is the development of clinical protocols for managing common medical problems that may impact breastfeeding success. These protocols serve only as guidelines for the care of breastfeeding mothers and infants and do not delineate an exclusive course of treatment or serve as standards of medical care. Variations in treatment may be appropriate according to the needs of an individual patient. The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine recognizes that not all lactating individuals identify as female. Using gender-inclusive language, however, is not possible in all languages and all countries and for all readers. The position of the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine (https://doi.org/10.1089/bfm.2021.29188.abm) is to interpret clinical protocols within the framework of inclusivity of all breastfeeding, chestfeeding, and human milk-feeding individuals.

Introduction: Health care providers treating lactating women for nipple and breast pain often attribute symptoms to Candida albicans infection. However, multiple other conditions may present with pain, erythema, and pruritis. We explored the experience of a breastfeeding medicine practice that received referrals for patients failing antifungal therapy and who desired further evaluation for alternative diagnoses. Materials and Methods: We conducted a retrospective chart review of breastfeeding women referred for evaluation of "yeast" to a breast surgery/breastfeeding medicine practice from July 2016 to August 2019. Results: Twenty-five women met inclusion criteria. Median age was 33 (range 24-43) and median months postpartum was 4 (range 0.5-18). All 25 women reported minimal to no improvement on oral and/or topical antifungal therapy. In addition to history and examination, milk culture was obtained in four women, punch biopsy in one, and core needle biopsy in one. No woman was confirmed to have a diagnosis of Candida. Diagnoses were changed to the following: subacute mastitis/mammary dysbiosis (n = 8), nipple bleb (n = 6), dermatitis (n = 6), vasospasm (n = 2), milk crust (n = 1), hyperlactation (n = 1), and postpartum depression (n = 1). Treatment included discontinuation of antifungal medication, as well as the following per individual diagnoses: antibiotics and probiotics; 0.1% triamcinolone cream; heat therapy; discontinuation of exclusive pumping; and antidepressant medication and counseling referral. All women experienced resolution of symptoms following revision of diagnosis and change in management (range 2-42 days). Conclusion: While persistent nipple and breast pain in breastfeeding is often attributed to Candida, this cohort demonstrates that providers should consider multiple other conditions in their differential diagnosis. Accurate, timely diagnosis is crucial, as pain is a risk factor for premature cessation of breastfeeding. Symptomatic resolution occurs on appropriate therapy.

Summary: Infected breast implants during lactation present a rare but challenging clinical scenario that may result in early cessation of breastfeeding and unnecessary morbidity to mother and infant. We present the case of a 39-year-old African American primigravid woman with a history of bilateral retropectoral textured implants placed three years prior. Five days after delivering a healthy, full-term infant via cesarean section, she sought evaluation for nipple pain and trauma. She was instructed to use a nipple shield and pump every 2–3 hours in addition to breastfeeding, which resulted in iatrogenic hyperlactation. One week postpartum, the patient was started on antibiotics for presumed mastitis. Ultrasound demonstrated a complex fluid collection at the 12 o’clock periareolar position, as well as peri-implant fluid. She subsequently underwent aspirations of a periareolar complex galactocele and aspirations of peri-implant fluid. She continued on antibiotics without improvement. The patient proceeded to implant removal and definitive drainage of the galactocele at four months postpartum. Throughout her course, the patient provided her infant with exclusive breastmilk, including breastfeeding in the perioperative area of the operating room. This case demonstrates an example of safe surgical removal of infected breast implants and management of an infected galactocele without interruption of breastfeeding.

BACKGROUND:Milk fistula is a potential complication of radiologic and surgical procedures on the lactating breast, though its incidence is unknown. Some postulate that larger defects and/or closer proximity to the nipple increase the risk of fistula.OBJECTIVE:This study aimed to estimate the incidence of milk fistula and characterize risk factors in patients who continued breastfeeding after surgical or radiological procedures.METHODS:A retrospective cohort analysis of pregnant or lactating women treated at a multidisciplinary breast clinic from July 2016 through August 2019 was performed. Demographic and clinical variables were analyzed using ANOVA and Pearson's Chi-square.RESULTS:Two pregnant and 43 lactating patients underwent 71 interventions. The incidence of milk fistula within one week of intervention was 1.4%. One fistula was diagnosed six days after retroareolar abscess drainage. The fistula closed successfully with continued breastfeeding. When categorized by the caliber of the most invasive intervention (large-caliber: mass excision, n = 7; medium-caliber: percutaneous drain insertion, n = 18; small-caliber: stab incision, aspiration, core needle biopsy, n = 20), patients were similar in age, race/ethnicity, weeks postpartum, and frequency of central versus peripheral interventions. The low incidence of fistula prevented quantitative evaluation of potential risk factors.CONCLUSIONS:Milk fistula is a rare occurrence following radiologic or surgical breast interventions performed during pregnancy or lactation. Indicated procedures should not be deferred, but periareolar approaches should be avoided when possible. Cessation of lactation is not mandatory for fistula closure, and continued breastfeeding should be recommended.

Nipple blebs are blister-like fibrinous lesions that form on the surface of the nipple during lactation, and can result in orifice obstruction and mastitis. They likely result from superficial extension of underlying ductal plugging, and can present concurrently with hyperlactation and mammary dysbiosis. Despite their prevalence, few formal reports on nipple blebs exist. In this perspective, we review the experience of a breastfeeding medicine practice that receives referrals for patients with nipple blebs, and provide preliminary insight into etiology, management, and outcomes of these lesions.