Patient-reported outcome measures in reconstructive breast surgery: is there a role for generic measures?

Systematic Review of Patient-Reported Outcomes and Complications of Pedicled Latissimus Flap Breast Reconstruction

The latissimus dorsi (LD) flap is a reliable option for breast reconstruction. This is particularly true in patients with contraindications to abdominally based autologous breast reconstruction. A systematic review of patient satisfaction and health related quality of life following LD breast reconstruction using the BREAST-Q survey was conducted. The scope of the review was to determine the degree of patient satisfaction following the procedure and to examine how patient satisfaction from the pedicled LD flap compares to other breast reconstructive procedures. A literature search on BREAST-Q in LD flap reconstruction was performed. Only articles written in English and in published peer-reviewed journals were included. Studies with less than 20 patients in their sample and those with a follow-up period of less than 1 year were excluded. Five articles representing 331 patients were reviewed, including one case-control study and four retrospective cohort studies. Level of evidence was either III (4) or IV (1). The average age was 53 with average body mass index of 25. Most reconstructions were delayed (67%) and unilateral (88%), and most patients required radiation (79%). The average length of follow-up was 36 months, and the response rate was 75%. Overall, patients who underwent LD flap reconstruction reported favorable outcomes in satisfaction domains and quality of life domains with few complications. A meta-analysis also demonstrated higher satisfaction in LD flap without implants compared with LD flap with implants. Patient-reported outcomes following LD breast reconstruction compare favorably with other techniques of breast reconstruction.

Health-related quality of life following breast reconstruction compared to total mastectomy and breast-conserving surgery among breast cancer survivors: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The present review evaluated health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) outcomes in surgical breast cancer survivors who received breast reconstruction (BR), breast-conservation surgery (BCS) or mastectomy (M), and whether HR-QoL domains across generic and disease/surgery-specific questionnaires are compatible. Six electronic databases were searched for appropriate observational studies. Standardized scores for different HR-QoL domains in the BR, BCS, and M treatment groups were extracted from each study for the purpose of a meta-analysis. Using Stata version 14.0, a random-effects meta-analysis model was adopted for each outcome variable to estimate the effect size, 95% CI-confidence intervals, and statistical significance. Sixteen of the 18 eligible studies with BR (n = 1474) and BCS (n = 2612) or M (n = 1458) groups were included in the meta-analysis. The BR group exhibited a better physical health (k = 12; 0.1, 95% CI 0.04, 0.24) and body image (k = 12; 0.50, 95% CI 0.10, 0.89) than the M group. However, the two groups exhibited comparable social health (k = 13; 0.1, 95% CI -0.07, 0.37), emotional health (k = 13; -0.08, 95% CI - 0.41, 0.25), global health (k = 7; 0.1, 95% CI - 0.01, 0.27), and sexual health (k =11; 0.2, 95% CI - 0.02,0.57). There was no clear evidence of the superiority of BR to BCS for all the six domains. These results suggest that HR-QoL outcomes in BR and BCS groups are better than the M group. Therefore, women opting for BR or BCS are likely to report fairly better HR-QoL outcomes than M. However, due to the significant heterogeneity observed in most BR versus BCS outcomes, developing a unified questionnaire incorporating both breast/surgery-specific and generic HR-QoL domains is warranted.

Patient-Centered Breast Reconstruction Based on Health-Related Quality-of-Life Evidence

The article summarizes the available evidence regarding clinical decision making in breast reconstruction from the patient perspective of satisfaction and health-related quality of life. A review of generic and specific patient reported outcome measures is provided. Important components of breast reconstruction care are compared, such as timing of reconstruction, autologous and implant-based reconstruction, and the use of nipple-sparing and skin-sparing mastectomy. This evidence-based summary will be useful to guide clinicians when discussing breast reconstruction with their patients.