Literature DB >> 19568038

Patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with breast reconstruction during the long-term survivorship Period.

Emily S Hu1, Andrea L Pusic, Jennifer F Waljee, Latoya Kuhn, Sarah T Hawley, Edwin Wilkins, Amy K Alderman.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Expander/implant and autogenous tissue breast reconstructions have different aging processes, and the time when these processes stabilize is unclear. The authors' goal was to evaluate long-term patient-reported aesthetic satisfaction with expander/implant and autogenous breast reconstruction.
METHODS: The authors surveyed a cross-section of University of Michigan women who underwent postmastectomy breast reconstruction (response rate, 73 percent) between 1988 and 2006 [110 expander/implant and 109 transverse rectus abdominis myocutaneous (TRAM) reconstructions]. Each group was stratified into three postreconstructive periods: short term (<or=5 years), intermediate (6 to 8 years), and long term (>8 years). Validated satisfaction items were scored on a 5-point Likert scale; scores were dichotomized into positive and negative responses. Logistic regression assessed satisfaction by procedure, while controlling for sociodemographic and clinical variables.
RESULTS: Mean follow-up time after reconstruction was 6.5 years (range, 1 to 18 years). Procedure type had no effect on short-term aesthetic satisfaction. However, in the long term, reconstruction type considerably affected satisfaction. Although satisfaction with TRAM reconstruction remained relatively constant, satisfaction with expander/implants was significantly less among those patients in the long term. Patients who had undergone implant reconstruction more than 8 years earlier, compared with those who undergone implant reconstruction less than 5 years earlier, were significantly less satisfied with breast appearance (odds ratio, 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.48), softness (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.64), and size (odds ratio, 0.13; 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.62).
CONCLUSIONS: In the long term, TRAM patients, compared with expander/implant patients, appear to have significantly greater aesthetic satisfaction. These long-term data have important implications for women's health in the survivorship period and will help women navigate the complex decision-making process of breast reconstruction.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2009        PMID: 19568038     DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181ab10b2

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


  53 in total

1.  Impact of Unilateral versus Bilateral Breast Reconstruction on Procedure Choices and Outcomes.

Authors:  Erin M Taylor; Edwin G Wilkins; Andrea L Pusic; Ji Qi; Hyungjin Myra Kim; Jennifer B Hamill; Gretchen E Guldbrandsen; Yoon S Chun
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2019-06       Impact factor: 4.730

2.  Immediate bilateral nipple-sparing mastectomy and implant-based breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Mark V Schaverien
Journal:  J Thorac Dis       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.895

3.  Tradeoffs Associated With Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy in Women Choosing Breast Reconstruction: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Cohort.

Authors:  Adeyiza O Momoh; Wess A Cohen; Kelley M Kidwell; Jennifer B Hamill; Ji Qi; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins; Evan Matros
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2017-07       Impact factor: 12.969

4.  Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Breast Reconstruction Options in the Setting of Postmastectomy Radiotherapy Using the BREAST-Q.

Authors:  Shantanu N Razdan; Peter G Cordeiro; Claudia R Albornoz; Teresa Ro; Wess A Cohen; Babak J Mehrara; Colleen M McCarthy; Joseph J Disa; Andrea L Pusic; Evan Matros
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 4.730

5.  Impact of Radiotherapy on Complications and Patient-Reported Outcomes After Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Reshma Jagsi; Adeyiza O Momoh; Ji Qi; Jennifer B Hamill; Jessica Billig; Hyungjin M Kim; Andrea L Pusic; Edwin G Wilkins
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 13.506

Review 6.  Trends and concepts in post-mastectomy breast reconstruction.

Authors:  Hana Farhangkhoee; Evan Matros; Joseph Disa
Journal:  J Surg Oncol       Date:  2016-02-14       Impact factor: 3.454

7.  Met and Unmet Expectations for Breast Reconstruction in Early Posttreatment Breast Cancer Survivors.

Authors:  Laurie E Steffen; Aimee Johnson; Beverly J Levine; Deborah K Mayer; Nancy E Avis
Journal:  Plast Surg Nurs       Date:  2017 Oct/Dec

8.  Trends and variation in use of breast reconstruction in patients with breast cancer undergoing mastectomy in the United States.

Authors:  Reshma Jagsi; Jing Jiang; Adeyiza O Momoh; Amy Alderman; Sharon H Giordano; Thomas A Buchholz; Steven J Kronowitz; Benjamin D Smith
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Challenging Considerations for the Surgeon.

Authors:  Peter Angelos; Isabelle Bedrosian; David M Euhus; Virginia M Herrmann; Steven J Katz; Andrea Pusic
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-08-11       Impact factor: 5.344

Review 10.  The BREAST-Q in surgical research: A review of the literature 2009-2015.

Authors:  Wess A Cohen; Lily R Mundy; Tiffany N S Ballard; Anne Klassen; Stefan J Cano; John Browne; Andrea L Pusic
Journal:  J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg       Date:  2015-11-26       Impact factor: 2.740

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.