QUALITATIVE ASSESSMENT OF BREAST RECONSTRUCTION IN A SPECIALIST BREAST UNIT

Implants versus autologous tissue flaps for breast reconstruction following mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Women who have a mastectomy for breast cancer treatment or risk reduction may be offered different options for breast reconstruction, including use of implants or the woman's own tissue (autologous tissue flaps). The choice of technique depends on factors such as the woman's preferences, breast characteristics, preoperative imaging, comorbidities, smoking habits, prior chest or breast irradiation, and planned adjuvant therapies.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of implants versus autologous tissue flaps for postmastectomy breast reconstruction on women's quality of life, satisfaction, and short- and long-term surgical complications.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trials registries in July 2022.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies that compared implant-based reconstruction with autologous tissue-based reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer treatment or risk reduction. The minimum eligible sample size was 100 participants.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias and extracted data using standard Cochrane procedures. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Thirty-five non-randomised studies with 57,555 participants met our inclusion criteria. There were nine prospective cohort studies and 26 retrospective cohort studies. We judged 26 studies at serious overall risk of bias and the remaining studies at moderate overall risk of bias. Some studies measured quality of life and satisfaction using the BREAST-Q (scale of 0 to 100, higher is better). Implants may reduce postoperative psychosocial well-being compared with autologous tissue flaps (mean difference (MD) -4.26 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) -4.91 to -3.61; I² = 0%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce or have little to no effect on postoperative physical well-being compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -1.92 points, 95% CI -4.44 to 0.60; I² = 87%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce postoperative sexual well-being compared with autologous reconstruction (MD -6.63 points, 95% CI -7.55 to -5.72; I² = 0; 6 studies, 3335 participants; low-certainty evidence). Women who undergo breast reconstruction with implants versus autologous tissue flaps may be less satisfied with the breast, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -8.17 points, 95% CI -11.41 to -4.92; I² = 90%; 6 studies, 3335 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This outcome refers to a woman's satisfaction with breast size, bra fit, appearance in the mirror (clothed or unclothed), and how the breast feels to touch. Women who undergo breast reconstruction with implants versus autologous tissue flaps may be less satisfied with the reconstruction (MD -5.96 points, 95% CI -10.24 to -1.68; I² = 62%; 4 studies, 1196 participants; low-certainty evidence). This outcome refers to whether the aesthetic outcome has met the woman's expectations, the impact surgery has had on her life, and whether she thinks she made the right decision to have the reconstruction. Implants may reduce or have little to no effect on the risk of short-term complications compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (risk ratio (RR) 0.80, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.03; I² = 91%; 22 studies, 34,244 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may increase long-term complications compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.56, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.22; I² = 94%; 17 studies, 26,930 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may have little to no effect on the need for reintervention compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.68; I² = 93%; 15 studies, 14,171 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Implants may reduce the duration of surgery compared with autologous tissue flaps, but the evidence is very uncertain (MD -125.04 minutes, 95% CI -131.41 to -118.67; I² = 0; 2 studies, 836 participants; very low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The findings of this review show that autologous tissue-based reconstruction compared with implant-based reconstruction may improve participant-reported outcomes such as psychosocial well-being, sexual well-being, and satisfaction with the reconstruction. There is also very uncertain evidence to suggest that autologous tissue-based reconstruction increases satisfaction with the breast and reduces the risk of long-term complications compared with implants. Implant-based reconstruction may be a shorter procedure, but the evidence is very uncertain. Despite the growing demand for breast reconstruction, the best technique has not been adequately studied in randomised controlled trials (RCTs), and the evidence provided by non-randomised studies is often unsatisfactory. There is no superior breast reconstruction technique for all women. Future research should focus on the definition of decisional drivers to guide an evidence-based shared decision-making process in reconstructive breast surgery.

Outcomes of reconstructive techniques in breast cancer using BCCT. core software

BACKGROUND

Surgery remains a priority for breast cancer treatment. This study aimed to compare the cosmetic outcomes of oncoplastic patients who had undergone breast-conserving surgery, mini-LDF (latissimus dorsi flap), and immediate implant reconstruction using both the Japanese scale and the BCCT.core (The Breast Cancer Conservative Treatment cosmetic results software) program and to validate this program.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients who underwent surgery for breast cancer between 1997 and 2021 were retrospectively studied. Patients were divided into three groups: 1-those who had undergone breast-conserving surgery (245 patients, 71.3%), 2-those who had undergone mini-LDF after lumpectomy (38 patients, 11.02%), and 3- those who underwent reconstruction with implants after nipple-sparing mastectomy (61 patients, 17.68%). The patients were called for a follow-up examination, and their photos were taken. The photographs were shown to an independent breast surgeon and a plastic surgeon who was not included in the surgeries, and they were asked to evaluate and rate them according to the Japanese cosmetic evaluation scale. The same images were transferred to the computer and scored using BCCT.core.

RESULTS

The plastic and breast surgeon evaluation results showed no significant difference between the three cosmetic techniques (p = 0.99, 0.98). The results of BCCT.core software measurements were similar to the results of plastic and breast surgeons (p: 0.43).

CONCLUSION

Patients are more knowledgeable about cosmetic outcomes and expect more objective data. In this study, we used 3 different cosmetic evaluation scales. We found that these techniques give results that are compatible with each other in terms of evaluating the work done in a more concrete way. For this reason, we recommend the use of such software, which offers objective results in a subjective field such as aesthetics and is very easy to apply.

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery for women with primary breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) involves removing the tumour in the breast and using plastic surgery techniques to reconstruct the breast. The adequacy of published evidence on the safety and efficacy of O-BCS for the treatment of breast cancer compared to other surgical options for breast cancer is still debatable. It is estimated that the local recurrence rate is similar to standard breast-conserving surgery (S-BCS) and also mastectomy, but the aesthetic and patient-reported outcomes may be improved with oncoplastic techniques.

OBJECTIVES

Our primary objective was to assess oncological control outcomes following O-BCS compared with other surgical options for women with breast cancer. Our secondary objective was to assess surgical complications, recall rates, need for further surgery to achieve adequate oncological resection, patient satisfaction through patient-reported outcomes, and cosmetic outcomes through objective measures or clinician-reported outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Breast Cancer Group's Specialized Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (via OVID), Embase (via OVID), the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and ClinicalTrials.gov on 7 August 2020. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised comparative studies (cohort and case-control studies). Studies evaluated any O-BCS technique, including volume displacement techniques and partial breast volume replacement techniques compared to any other surgical treatment (partial resection or mastectomy) for the treatment of breast cancer.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors performed data extraction and resolved disagreements. We used ROBINS-I to assess the risk of bias by outcome. We performed descriptive data analysis and meta-analysis and evaluated the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria. The outcomes included local recurrence, breast cancer-specific disease-free survival, re-excision rates, complications, recall rates, and patient-reported outcome measures.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 78 non-randomised cohort studies evaluating 178,813 women. Overall, we assessed the risk of bias per outcome as being at serious risk of bias due to confounding; where studies adjusted for confounding, we deemed these at moderate risk. Comparison 1: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus standard-BCS (S-BCS) The evidence in the review found that O-BCS when compared to S-BCS, may make little or no difference to local recurrence; either when measured as local recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.61 to 1.34; 4 studies, 7600 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or local recurrence rate (HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.96 to 1.83; 4 studies, 2433 participants; low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain due to most studies not controlling for confounding clinicopathological factors. O-BCS compared to S-BCS may make little to no difference to disease-free survival (HR 1.06, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.26; 7 studies, 5532 participants; low-certainty evidence). O-BCS may reduce the rate of re-excisions needed for oncological resection (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.85; 38 studies, 13,341 participants; very low-certainty evidence), but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may increase the number of women who have at least one complication (RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.27; 20 studies, 118,005 participants; very low-certainty evidence) and increase the recall to biopsy rate (RR 2.39, 95% CI 1.67 to 3.42; 6 studies, 715 participants; low-certainty evidence). Meta-analysis was not possible when assessing patient-reported outcomes or cosmetic evaluation; in general, O-BCS reported a similar or more favourable result, however, the evidence is very uncertain due to risk of bias in the measurement methods. Comparison 2: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy alone O-BCS may increase local recurrence-free survival compared to mastectomy but the evidence is very uncertain (HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.91; 2 studies, 4713 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of O-BCS on disease-free survival as there were only data from one study. O-BCS may reduce complications compared to mastectomy, but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias mainly resulting from confounding (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.83; 4 studies, 4839 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Data on patient-reported outcome measures came from single studies; it was not possible to meta-analyse the data. Comparison 3: oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery (O-BCS) versus mastectomy with reconstruction O-BCS may make little or no difference to local recurrence-free survival (HR 1.37, 95% CI 0.72 to 2.62; 1 study, 3785 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or disease-free survival (HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.22; 1 study, 317 participants; very low-certainty evidence) when compared to mastectomy with reconstruction, but the evidence is very uncertain. O-BCS may reduce the complication rate compared to mastectomy with reconstruction (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.45 to 0.54; 5 studies, 4973 participants; very low-certainty evidence) but the evidence is very uncertain due to high risk of bias from confounding and inconsistency of results. The evidence is very uncertain for patient-reported outcome measures and cosmetic evaluation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The evidence is very uncertain regarding oncological outcomes following O-BCS compared to S-BCS, though O-BCS has not been shown to be inferior. O-BCS may result in less need for a second re-excision surgery but may result in more complications and a greater recall rate than S-BCS. It seems that O-BCS may give better patient satisfaction and surgeon rating for the look of the breast, but the evidence for this is of poor quality, and due to lack of numerical data, it was not possible to pool the results of different studies. It seems O-BCS results in fewer complications compared with surgeries involving mastectomy. Based on this review, no certain conclusions can be made to help inform policymakers. The surgical decision for what operation to proceed with should be made jointly between clinician and patient after an appropriate discussion about the risks and benefits of O-BCS personalised to the patient, taking into account clinicopathological factors. This review highlighted the deficiency of well-conducted studies to evaluate efficacy, safety and patient-reported outcomes following O-BCS.

Quality of life, patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome after delayed breast reconstruction using DIEP flap: a 10 years' follow-up survey

Autologous breast reconstruction (BR) aims to restore body image and improve health-related quality of life in women undergoing mastectomy due to breast cancer. We wanted to explore patient-reported cosmetic results and satisfaction 10 or more years post BR surgery, using deep inferior epigastric perforator flap (DIEP). This is a follow-up study based on the same patient population of 34 patients undergoing delayed DIEP-flap procedure during 2001-2004 at Oslo University Hospital investigated by our group and published in 2008; Four patients died during the 10 years' follow-up time and four patients with total or partial flap failure were excluded. The average age for reconstruction was 51.4 years (SD 5.8). The participants answered study-specific questions based on the first study, evaluated cosmetic results using the visual analog scale (VAS) and BREAST-Q post-mastectomy reconstruction module. The response rate was 85% (22/26). A significantly reduced number of patients reported satisfaction with the appearance of breasts (p = .035). The consistency of the reconstructed breast was significantly better evaluated with VAS score (p = .039). The patients reported overall satisfactory results based on Q-scores using the BREAST-Q post-mastectomy reconstruction module. Patients reported a generally high level of satisfaction with BR and cosmetic results 10 or more years after delayed DIEP-flap procedure. Although a significantly decreased number of patients reported satisfaction with the appearance of the breast, almost all patients would have chosen BR again, and the consistency of the reconstructed breast was evaluated as improved.

Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Breast Reconstruction Surgery and Therapeutic Mammoplasty: Prospective Evaluation 1 Year Post-Surgery with BREAST-Q Questionnaire

Breast Cancer (BC) treatment leads to mutilation and destruction of breast shape with negative effects on body image and self-esteem.One of the main goals of reconstructive and oncoplastic breast surgery is to satisfy patients and improve their quality of life (QoL).Therefore, it is important to assess the patient experience post-surgery by means of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) that focus on the patient's perception of the surgery and surgical care, as well as psychosocial well-being and physical functioning. The objective of the current study was to identify predictors of patient satisfaction such as breast appearance including implant type in a selective sample of women who underwent breast reconstruction surgery using implants. Participants in this prospective study were women, (age 26-75 years) that were newly diagnosed with breast carcinoma. All consecutive patients who underwent breast reconstruction between January 2013 and October 2014 were asked to complete the BREAST-Q questionnaire 1 year after surgery. 120 patients underwent unilateral breast reconstruction using implant. While 38 patients underwent reconstruction with opposite breast reduction symmertization, 27 patients underwent therapeutic mammoplasty. The response rate for BREAST-Q questionnaire completion was 98 % with 147 out of 150 study participants completed the questionnaire. From the data collected from 147 patients, the responses could be distributed into 4 distinct groups based on the reconstruction outcomes namely "very much satisfied" (93 %) or "definitely and mostly satisfied" (94 %) or "satisfied" with the outcome (88 %) or "definitely agree on having reconstruction rather than the alternative of having no breast "(91 %).The results showed significant improvement in all four areas that were evaluated after surgery namely satisfaction with the appearance of the breasts, psychosocial, sexual and physical well-being. While the reconstruction surgery had an overall positive impact on quality of life it was observed that in patients that did not undergo breast reconstruction psychological issues related to sexuality were observed. Many newly diagnosed BC patients do not opt for these new surgical procedures due to psychological trauma or lack of information. Based on these observations, we propose that Breast Cancer Management protocols should also include additional counselling support for the newly diagnosed BC patients on the option of breast reconstruction along with conventional medical treatment counselling by the Oncosurgeon.

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

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported outcomes provide an invaluable tool in the assessment of outcomes in plastic surgery. Traditionally, patient-reported outcomes have consisted of either generic or ad hoc measures; however, more recently, there has been interest in formally constructed and validated questionnaires that are specifically designed for a particular patient population. The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether generic measures still have a role in the evaluation of breast reconstruction outcomes, given the recent popularity and push for use of specific measures.

METHODS

A systematic review was performed to identify all articles using patient-reported outcomes in the assessment of postmastectomy breast reconstruction. Frequency of use was tabulated and the most frequently used tools were assessed for success of use, using criteria described previously by the Medical Outcomes Trust.

RESULTS

To date, the most frequently used measures are still generic measures. The 36-Item Short-Form Health Survey was the most frequently used and most successfully applied showing evidence of responsiveness in multiple settings. Other measures such as the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, the Hopwood Body Image Scale, and the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale were able to show responsiveness in certain settings but lacked evidence as universal tools for the assessment of outcomes in reconstructive breast surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the recent advent of measures designed specifically to assess patient-reported outcomes in the breast reconstruction population, there still appears to be a role for the use of generic instruments. Many of these tools would benefit from undergoing formal validation in the breast reconstruction population.

From radical mastectomy to breast-conserving therapy and oncoplastic breast surgery: a narrative review comparing oncological result, cosmetic outcome, quality of life, and health economy

Surgical management of breast cancer has evolved considerably over the last two decades. There has been a major shift toward less-invasive local treatments, from radical mastectomy to breast-conserving therapy (BCT) and oncoplastic breast surgery (OBS). In order to investigate the efficacy of each of the three abovementioned methods, a literature review was conducted for measurable outcomes including local recurrence, survival, cosmetic outcome, quality of life (QOL), and health economy. From the point of view of oncological result, there is no difference between mastectomy and BCT in local recurrence rate and survival. Long-term results for OBS are not available. The items assessed in the QOL sound a better score for OBS in comparison with mastectomy or BCT. OBS is also associated with a better cosmetic outcome. Although having low income seems to be associated with lower BCT and OBS utilization, prognosis of breast cancer is worse in these women as well. Thus, health economy is the matter that should be studied seriously. OBS is an innovative, progressive, and complicated subspeciality that lacks published randomized clinical trials comparing surgical techniques and objective measures of outcome, especially from oncologic and health economy points of view.

Developing a theoretical framework to illustrate associations among patient satisfaction, body image and quality of life for women undergoing breast reconstruction

Within the field of breast reconstruction there is increasing focus on patient-reported outcomes related to satisfaction, body image, and quality of life. These outcomes are deemed highly relevant because the primary goal of breast reconstruction is to recreate the appearance of a breast (or breasts) that is satisfying to the patient. Prominent researchers have suggested the need to develop improved standards for outcome evaluation which can ultimately benefit patients as well as physicians. The purpose of this article is to summarize key findings in the area of patient-reported outcomes for breast reconstruction and introduce a theoretical framework for advancing research in this field. We conducted an extensive literature review of outcome studies for breast reconstruction focusing on patient-reported results. We developed a theoretical framework illustrating core patient-reported outcomes related to breast reconstruction and factors associated with these outcomes. Our theoretical model highlights domains and distinguishing features of patient satisfaction, body image, and quality of life outcomes for women undergoing breast reconstruction. This model further identifies a broad range of variables (e.g., historical/premorbid influences, disease and treatment-related factors) that have been found to influence patient-reported outcomes and need to be taken into consideration when designing future research in this area. Additional attention is given to examining the relationship between patient reported outcomes and outside evaluation of breast reconstruction. Our proposed theoretical framework suggests key opportunities to expand research in this area with the goal of optimizing body image adjustment, satisfaction, and psychosocial outcomes for the individual patient.

Self-esteem and patients' satisfaction after deep inferior epigastric perforator flap breast reconstruction

The objective of this article is to assess the impact of deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap breast reconstruction on self-esteem and to analyze the correlation between aesthetic outcome and self-esteem. Global self-esteem was evaluated using the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale in 31 patients who underwent DIEP flap breast reconstructions. A study-specific questionnaire and photographic evaluation were used by the patient, the plastic surgeon, and the oncological surgeon to measure satisfaction with the aesthetic outcome. Patients' satisfaction and self-esteem were analyzed for any existing correlation. Overall patients' satisfaction had a mean score of 6.55 (range, 0-10) on the Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire. A mean score of 32.48 (range, 10-40) was found on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. More than 80% of patients were content with their decision to undergo this procedure and would recommend this to a friend. Surgeons tended to rate the aesthetic outcome better than patients. Patients' satisfaction and self-esteem were found to be positively correlated. Patients are generally content with the outcome of primary DIEP flap breast reconstruction. The favorable aesthetic result of this procedure has a beneficial effect on patients' self-esteem.

Imagem corporal de mulheres com câncer de mama: uma revisão sistemática da literatura

A mulher passa por um importante processo de reformulação da imagem corporal quando lida com o câncer de mama. Este artigo objetiva a compreensão da relação que o câncer de mama e seus tratamentos têm no processo de (re)elaboração da imagem corporal das mulheres, visando assim ao fomento de subsídios para a formação e a capacitação de profissionais de saúde mais atentos à promoção da qualidade de vida delas. Foi realizada uma revisão sistemática da literatura de artigos científicos publicados entre 2004 e 2009 disponíveis em três bases de dado; 56 artigos foram revisados e agrupados em quatro categorias. Destacamos a necessidade de mais estudos que contemplem características socioculturais de mulheres com câncer de mama, sobre diferenças na (re)elaboração da imagem corporal de mulheres jovens e de mulheres mais velhas, e de publicações brasileiras sobre a experiência pessoal e aspectos socioculturais específicos de mulheres com câncer de mama.

Differences between women who have and have not undergone breast reconstruction after mastectomy due to breast cancer

AIM

This study compares potential differences between women with breast cancer who after mastectomy had undergone breast reconstruction with those who had not.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

All women (N=149) in the northern medical region of Sweden who had undergone mastectomy in 2003 received a self-reported questionnaire entitled "Life After Mastectomy (LAM)" that included standardized measures of sociodemographic, decision-making process, breast reconstruction (BR) yes or no, sexuality, and body image. SPSS was used for data processing.

RESULTS

In total 85% of the women returned the questionnaire and of these 25% had undergone BR. In accordance with previous studies, we found that the mean age of the women in the BR group was significantly lower (52 vs. 64 years), they had a higher education, and a higher proportion were employed, influenced by the physician's opinion regarding BR, sexually active, and rated a negative impact concerning the factors attractiveness and body disclosure. A multiple regression analysis, however, showed that the choice to undergo breast reconstruction or not was only independently associated with age, feeling of attractiveness and sexual interest.

DISCUSSION

Age explained most differences found between the two groups. When researchers try to identify what differentiates the groups of women who undergo reconstruction between those who do not undergo reconstruction after mastectomy, it is thus necessary to take into consideration that the meanings of mastectomy, body image, attractiveness and similar variables may vary due to the phase of a woman's life. In conclusion, considering the impact of age is of paramount importance in future studies for our understanding of women's experiences.

Health-related quality of life assessment after breast reconstruction

Background

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) is an important outcome following breast reconstruction. This study evaluated current methods of HRQL assessment in patients undergoing latissimus dorsi breast reconstruction, hypothesizing that early surgical morbidity would be reflected by poorer HRQL scores.

Methods

Patients completed the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30 and breast module (QLQ-BR23), the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT) general measure, and breast module and arm subscale (FACT-B + 4), and the Body Image Scale and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) 3 months after surgery. They also reported additional HRQL problems not included in the questionnaires. HRQL scores were compared between patients with and without early surgical morbidity.

Results

Sixty women completed the questionnaires, of whom 25 (42 per cent) experienced complications. All EORTC and FACT subscale and HADS scores were similar in patients with or without morbidity. Women with complications were twice as likely to report feeling less feminine and dissatisfied with the appearance of their scar than those without problems. Thirty-two women (53 per cent) complained of problems not covered by the questionnaires, most commonly donor-site morbidity.

Conclusion

Existing HRQL instruments are not sufficiently sensitive to detect clinically relevant problems following breast reconstruction.

Quality of life, patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome after breast reconstruction using DIEP flap or expandable breast implant

In a cross-sectional postal survey, we compared patient-reported outcomes in patients undergoing breast reconstruction with the deep inferior epigastric perforator (DIEP) flap or an expandable breast implant (EBI). We included 34 consecutive patients who had breast reconstruction with DIEP flap and 30 patients with EBI. Outcomes were assessed using the Short Form 36 (SF-36) quality of life questionnaire, two study-specific patient satisfaction questionnaires and a visual analogue scale (VAS) on cosmetic result. There were no significant differences in SF-36 subscale scores between the two groups. On the study-specific questionnaire, more patients in the DIEP group were satisfied with the appearance of their breast (P<0.0005) and reported an improved social relationship (P=0.02), and fewer patients were sad about their body image (P=0.01) after reconstruction than in the EBI group. On the other study-specific items, satisfaction was similar in the two groups. On all five VAS items, DIEP patients reported better cosmetic results than EBI patients. We conclude that patient satisfaction and cosmetic outcome were better after breast reconstruction with the DIEP flap compared with EBI, while there was no difference in health-related quality of life.

Defining the role for autologous breast reconstruction after mastectomy: social and oncologic implications

Breast reconstruction plays a significant role in the management of breast cancer. The removal of a breast has implications for the psychologic, social, and sexual well-being of the patient, establishing the need for discussion of postmastectomy breast reconstruction with suitable patients. However, operative morbidity and the potential for diminished oncologic safety are ongoing issues of contention. A Medline literature review was performed to evaluate the interplay between the psychosocial need for breast reconstruction in patients after mastectomy and the issues surrounding its oncologic safety. Immediate breast reconstruction does not impair the oncologic safety of breast cancer management, with no increase in local recurrence rates, and no delays in the initiation of adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy (RT). Immediate breast reconstruction in the setting of chemotherapy is not associated with greater complication rates; however, there is some evidence for increased complications in the setting of adjuvant RT. Breast reconstruction has a positive effect on the psychosocial outcomes of mastectomy and is oncologically safe in the immediate and delayed settings. Ultimately, the decision-making process of whether to reconstruct, how to reconstruct, and when to reconstruct requires a multidisciplinary approach, with the patient, plastic surgeon, oncologic surgeon, medical oncologist, and radiation oncologist all contributing.

Correlates of the desire for improved cosmetic results after breast-conserving therapy and mastectomy in breast cancer patients

The aim of this survey was to evaluate correlates for the patient's desire for surgical improvement of the cosmetic outcome after the primary operation for breast cancer. A cross-sectional study was carried out in a single follow-up outpatient clinic using a questionnaire. Patients were asked to assess their degree of satisfaction with the cosmetic results of their primary surgery and to state if they would like to undergo a further breast surgery to improve the appearance. Patients' characteristics were correlated with this desire. After breast-conserving surgery, 21.6% of the patients stated that they desired surgical improvement, in comparison with 29.8% of the patients who underwent mastectomy. In the latter group, the desire for improvement remained constant up to 5years after the initial operation, whereas it declined in the group of patients after breast-conserving surgery. Furthermore, a younger age and the perception that the appearance negatively influences femininity, partnership or sexual life were associated with a desire for further surgery. Breast reconstruction after mastectomy can be discussed with the patients even after a long follow-up, especially when the appearance seems to influence partnership issues.

Incidence of Complications in Outpatient Mastectomy with Immediate Reconstruction

BACKGROUND

Although breast surgery, including mastectomy, is increasingly being performed on an outpatient basis, skepticism remains about the safety of outpatient mastectomy with immediate breast reconstruction. Studies have demonstrated a psychologic benefit to outpatient breast surgery in addition to the clear financial benefit. We sought to determine whether or not the postoperative complication rate after outpatient mastectomy with immediate reconstruction is low enough to consider the procedure safe and effective.

STUDY DESIGN

Charts were retrospectively reviewed for all patients who underwent outpatient mastectomies with immediate breast reconstruction at St Vincent's Comprehensive Cancer Center between December 2000 and June 2004. The presence or absence of postoperative complications was determined from records during the postoperative period and subsequent office visit.

RESULTS

Of 29 outpatient mastectomies with immediate reconstruction performed on 28 patients (one had independent procedures on each breast), only one procedure (3%) required subsequent admission to the hospital (for bleeding). Other complications included three seromas, two cases of cellulitis requiring antibiotics, and one hematoma. The overall complication rate was 24% (7 of 29), with only 14% (1 of 7) of the complications requiring hospitalization.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate that outpatient mastectomy with immediate reconstruction is a safe and effective procedure for carefully selected patients. The complication rates for our patient population are similar to those in other published reports on outpatient operations, most notably, those of outpatient mastectomy without immediate reconstruction.

Oncoplastic Breast-Conserving Surgery: Analysis of Quadrantectomy and Immediate Reconstruction with Latissimus Dorsi Flap

BACKGROUND

Oncoplastic breast-conserving surgery satisfies oncologic principles and improves cosmetic outcomes, even when an important breast volume excision is required.

METHODS

We reviewed 28 patients suffering from breast cancer treated with quadrantectomy and immediate myocutaneous latissimus dorsi flap reconstruction. We evaluated the status of the surgical margins, early complications, and cosmetic outcome. Cosmetic assessment was carried out by a panel made up of three women and one man: a female member of an association against breast cancer, a female general practitioner, a female gynecologic resident, and a male breast-specialized surgeon.

RESULTS

Free margins were obtained in all cases. There were 11 postoperative complications: 9 seromas at the donor site, 1 dehiscence of the back wound, and 1 minor partial flap skin necrosis. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy adjuvant treatment was not compromised. The cosmesis outcome was deemed to be good in 43.75% of the cases and satisfactory in 56.25%. The score for overall cosmesis outcome was 6.92 out of 10. Symmetry and the scar of the reconstructed breast were the most influential criteria in the quantitative assessment of overall cosmetic results.

CONCLUSION

Partial mastectomy (quadrantectomy) and immediate reconstruction with a myocutaneous latissimus dorsi flap allows extensive resection, which fits oncologic requirements, without serious morbidity and a good cosmetic outcome.

Association of information satisfaction, psychological distress and monitoring coping style with post-decision regret following breast reconstruction

Little is known of the psychosocial factors associated with decision regret in the context of breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer treatment. Moreover, there is a paucity of theoretically-based research in the area of post-decision regret. Adopting the theoretical framework of the Monitoring Process Model (Cancer 1995;76(1):167-177), the current study assessed the role of information satisfaction, current psychological distress and the moderating effect of monitoring coping style to the experience of regret over the decision to undergo reconstructive surgery. Women (N=123) diagnosed with breast cancer who had undergone immediate or delayed breast reconstruction following mastectomy participated in the study. The majority of participants (52.8%, n=65) experienced no decision regret, 27.6% experienced mild regret and 19.5% moderate to strong regret. Bivariate analyses indicated that decision regret was associated with low satisfaction with preparatory information, depression, anxiety and stress. Multinominal logistic regression analysis showed, controlling for mood state and time since last reconstructive procedure, that lower satisfaction with information and increased depression were associated with increased likelihood of experiencing regret. Monitoring coping style moderated the association between anxiety and regret (beta=-0.10, OR=0.91, p=0.01), whereby low monitors who were highly anxious had a greater likelihood of experiencing regret than highly anxious high monitors.