Literature DB >> 10626972

A prospective and randomized study, "SVEA," comparing effects of three methods for delayed breast reconstruction on quality of life, patient-defined problem areas of life, and cosmetic result.

Y Brandberg1, M Malm, L Blomqvist.   

Abstract

During the last 30 years, many methods for delayed breast reconstruction have been described. There is a lack of prospective randomized trials comparing reconstruction methods. The present study (SVEA), conducted 1995 to 1996, describes the impacts of three methods: the lateral thoracodorsal flap, the latissimus dorsi flap, and the pedicled transverse rectus abdominis muscle flap (TRAM), on important areas of life, patients' perception of cosmetic result, and quality of life. Questionnaires were completed before randomization and at 6 and 12 months postoperatively. The preoperative questionnaire concerned the impact of breast loss and expectations on reconstruction. Follow-up questionnaires dealt with satisfaction with cosmetic result and impact on important areas of life. A health-related quality-of-life questionnaire (SF-36) was completed at all points of assessment. A total of 75 of 87 randomized patients underwent breast reconstruction: 16 patients with the lateral thoracodorsal flap, 30 with the latissimus dorsi flap, and 29 with the TRAM flap. The majority were very satisfied with the cosmetic result. Most women reported improvements in important areas of life, and quality of life in terms of "social functioning" and "mental health" increased significantly after the reconstruction. The latissimus dorsi flap and TRAM flap scored significantly higher as compared with the lateral thoracodorsal flap for similarity with the contralateral breast and reduced problems in social situations. No differences between irradiated and nonirradiated patients were found. All methods were considered to produce good cosmetic results and improvements in patient-defined problem areas of life and quality of life. No negative effects were recorded. Thus, irrespective of method, breast reconstruction is a valuable tool for the mastectomized woman to cope with problems in everyday life.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2000        PMID: 10626972     DOI: 10.1097/00006534-200001000-00011

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  23 in total

Review 1.  Quality of life assessment in surgical oncology trials.

Authors:  Kerry Avery; Jane M Blazeby
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2006-07       Impact factor: 3.352

2.  Improvement in Breast Reconstruction Disparities following Medicaid Expansion under the Affordable Care Act.

Authors:  Kirithiga Ramalingam; Liang Ji; Saeed Pairawan; David Caba Molina; Sharon S Lum
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 5.344

3.  Comparison of 2-Year Complication Rates Among Common Techniques for Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Katelyn G Bennett; Ji Qi; Hyungjin M Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  JAMA Surg       Date:  2018-10-01       Impact factor: 14.766

Review 4.  Women's expectations of breast reconstruction following mastectomy for breast cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  Kathy Flitcroft; Meagan Brennan; Andrew Spillane
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2017-05-04       Impact factor: 3.603

5.  Utilization of mastectomy and reconstruction in the outpatient setting.

Authors:  Laura Kruper; Xin Xin Xu; Katherine Henderson; Leslie Bernstein; Steven L Chen
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 5.344

6.  Health insurance coverage and racial disparities in breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

Authors:  Tetyana P Shippee; Katy B Kozhimannil; Kathleen Rowan; Beth A Virnig
Journal:  Womens Health Issues       Date:  2014 May-Jun

7.  Risk-reducing, conservative mastectomy-analysis of surgical outcome and quality of life in 272 implant-based reconstructions using TiLoop(®) Bra versus autologous corial flaps.

Authors:  Mahdi Rezai; Stefanie Strauß; Rainer Kimmig; Peter Kern
Journal:  Gland Surg       Date:  2016-02

8.  Distance to a Plastic Surgeon and Type of Insurance Plan Are Independently Predictive of Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Michelle C Roughton; Paul DiEgidio; Lei Zhou; Karyn Stitzenberg; Anne Marie Meyer
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016-08       Impact factor: 4.730

9.  Body image dissatisfaction in patients undergoing breast reconstruction: Examining the roles of breast symmetry and appearance investment.

Authors:  Irene Teo; Gregory P Reece; Sheng-Cheng Huang; Kanika Mahajan; Johnny Andon; Pujjal Khanal; Clement Sun; Krista Nicklaus; Fatima Merchant; Mia K Markey; Michelle Cororve Fingeret
Journal:  Psychooncology       Date:  2017-12-19       Impact factor: 3.894

10.  Development and Validation of the BREAST-Q Breast-Conserving Therapy Module.

Authors:  Anne F Klassen; Laura Dominici; Sarah Fuzesi; Stefan J Cano; Dunya Atisha; Tracie Locklear; Madelijn L Gregorowitsch; Elena Tsangaris; Monica Morrow; Tari King; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 5.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.