This article provides an overview of the main controversies in a number of key areas of breast cancer management. Relevant studies that have contributed to guide the treatment of this heterogeneous disease in the field of breast screening, surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy are highlighted. Mammography and ultrasound are the main methods of breast screening. MRI and tomosynthesis are emerging as new screening tools for a selected group of breast cancer patients. From a surgical perspective, oncoplastic techniques and neoadjuvant chemotherapy are improving cosmetic results in breast-conserving surgery. For high-risk patients, controversies still remain regarding prophylactic mastectomies. Finally, the appropriate management of the axilla continues evolving with the increasing role of radiotherapy as an alternative treatment to axillary dissection.

Background: The usage of antibiotics and antiseptics to washout the breast pocket, or to soak the breast implant during surgery, has come under scrutiny in recent times. Guidelines from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention give no recommendation for or against the usage of antibiotics in this regard. They do however offer a weak recommendation for washing tissues with iodophor. This systematic review aims to investigate the efficacy and impact of such topical antibiotic or antiseptic usage in reducing infection rates. Methods: A systematic electronic search was performed on the PreMEDLINE, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL (Cochrane) databases from inception to April 2017. Reference search was performed manually through Scopus. Results of the searches were independently screened by 2 reviewers (A.F. and P.H.). Studies involving an implant or tissue expander, with appropriate controls were included. Meta-analyses were performed where possible and data summarized when not. Results: Three retrospective cohort studies were found to fit the review requirements. No randomized control trials were found. These studies covered a period of 1996–2010 for a total of 3,768 women undergoing augmentative surgery. The usage of antibiotics in pocket washout or implant immersion resulted in lower infection rates (RR = 0.52; P = 0.004; 95% CI = 0.34–0.81). Conclusions: There is a clinical benefit in using antibiotics for breast pocket irrigation and implant immersion. However, the quality of the evidence obtained in this review is low; hence, we recommend a randomized control trial for a higher level of evidence on this important issue.

The evolution of indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence in breast and axilla surgery from an Australasian perspective is discussed in this narrative review with a focus on breast cancer and reconstruction surgery. The authors have nearly a decade of experience with ICG in a high-volume institution, which has resulted in publications and ongoing future research evaluating its use for predicting mastectomy skin flap perfusion for reconstruction, lymphatic mapping for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, and axillary reverse mapping (ARM) for prevention of lymphoedema. In the authors’ experience, routine use of ICG angiography during breast reconstruction postmastectomy was demonstrated to be cost-effective for the reduction of ischemic complications in the Australian setting. A novel tracer combination, ICG–technetium-99m offered a safe and effective substitute to the “gold standard” dual tracer for SLN biopsy, although greater costs were associated with ICG. An ongoing trial will evaluate ARM node identification using ICG fluorescence during axillary lymph node dissection and potential predictive factors of ARM node involvement. These data add to the growing literature on ICG and allow future research to build on this to improve understanding of the potential benefits of fluorescence-guided surgery in breast cancer and reconstruction surgery.